03.04.2025 Harminder S nder Singh v. Harvinder K der Kaur and another
Case Details
CR-2053-20 2025 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIG HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA D HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 125 CR-2053-2025 Date of Decision: 03.04.2025 Harminder S nder Singh .…Petitioner Versus Harvinder K der Kaur and another ....Respondents CORAM: H M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH NIDHI GUPTA Present: - Mr. Sandeep K. Sharma, Advoc Advocate for the petitioner. NIDHI GUP I GUPTA, J. 1. Challenge in the present revisio revision petition filed by the tenant- petitioner is is to the order dated 25.03.2025 pa llate 025 passed by the learned Appellate Authority, F rity, Fatehgarh Sahib, whereby the a oner the appeal filed by the petitioner against the t the judgment/order dated 02.11.20 rned .11.2023, rendered by the learned Rent Contro ontroller, was dismissed. 2. Brief facts of the case are that had e that the respondent-landlords had filed an app an application under Section 13 of ent 3 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction ction Act, 1949 (hereinafter refer referred for to as ‘the Act’) for eviction/ejec n/ejectment of the petitioner-tenant ises. enant from the demised premises. Eviction of on of the petitioner was sought on ac t of t on account of: a) non-payment of rent from the om the year 1992; and b) bona fide ne ide necessity of the landlords. Vide order dated dated 02.11.2023 the learned Rent Co wed ent Controller, Khamanon, allowed the ejectmen ctment petition filed by the responden ondent-landlords and the petitioner- tenant was was granted one month’s time to h sical e to hand over the vacant physical possession o sion of the demised premises to the ling o the respondent-landlords. Feeling aggrieved ag ved against the aforesaid order of evi filed of eviction, the petitioner had filed RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.05 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-2053-20 2025 (O&M) -2- an appeal dated 13.12.2023 before the l rity, the learned Appellate Authority, Fatehgarh S arh Sahib, which was dismissed ated issed vide impugned order dated 2025. 25.03.2025. 3.
Legal Reasoning
Learned counsel for the petition mits petitioner-tenant, inter alia, submits that the impu e impugned orders deserve to be set as filed set aside as, in the application filed by the respo respondent-landlords under Section 1 ent tion 13 of the Act, the learned Rent Controller, v , vide order dated 02.05.2017 (An the 17 (Annexure P-1) had assessed the Provisional ional Rent @ ₹1,000/- per month w.e i.e. w.e.f. January, 1992 till date i.e. for 305 mon 5 months. Resultantly, the arrears of re oner rs of rent to be paid by the petitioner were calcula alculated to be ₹5,39,325/-. It is subm was is submitted that the said order was assailed by t d by the petitioner before the learned vide arned Appellate Authority; and vide order dated dated 21.08.2017 (Annexure P-2) pas llate 2) passed by the learned Appellate Authority, a , appeal of the petitioner was dis ers as dismissed. The aforesaid orders dated 02.05. 02.05.2017 and 21.08.2017 (Annexur nnexures P-1 and P-2, respectively) were challen hallenged by the petitioner-tenant bef nt before this Court by way of CR- 6390-2017. 2017. Vide order dated 19.09.2017 (A had 017 (Annexure P-3), this Court had remanded th ded the matter back to the learned Ap sion Appellate Authority for decision afresh. Purs . Pursuant to same, the learned App rder d Appellate Authority, vide order dated 11.01. 11.01.2018 (Annexure P-4) directed t er to ected the learned Rent Controller to make fresh fresh assessment of the Provisional the isional Rent to be payable by the petitioner. However, the ld. Rent Controller 023 troller, vide order dated 04.10.2023 (Annexure P xure P-5) again assessed the Provi the rovisional Rent payable by the petitioner @ @ ₹1,000/- per month w.e.f. 01.01 the . 01.01.1992 to 30.09.2023; and the arrears now s now payable by the petitioner were 6.50 were calculated to be ₹7,21,026.50 paisa. RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.05 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-2053-20 2025 (O&M) -3- 4. It is submitted that subsequentl ated quently, vide impugned order dated 02.11.2023, 2023, the eviction of the petitioner w ised oner was ordered from the demised premises. T ses. The said order was challenged the nged by the petitioner before the learned App d Appellate Authority and vide an ated another impugned order dated 25.03.2025, 2025, the appeal filed by the petitioner itioner has also been dismissed. 5. Learned counsel for the petiti t by petitioner-tenant contends that by way of filing f filing appeal before the learned Appe oner d Appellate Authority, the petitioner had also lai so laid challenge to the order dated 5) dated 04.10.2023 (Annexure P-5) whereby the by the learned Rent Controller had re ent ad re-assessed the Provisional Rent to be paid b paid by the petitioner. However, pe rder er, perusal of the impugned order dated 25.03. 25.03.2025, shows that no considerat the sideration has been afforded by the learned App d Appellate Authority as to whether t een ether the Provisional Rent has been properly ass ly assessed by the learned Rent ated Rent Controller vide order dated 04.10.2023 ( 2023 (Annexure P-5). It is submitted ave mitted that in fact, at no stage have the earned Authorities below consider learned nsidered the correctness of the the provisional ional rent. As such, the petitioner an itioner has been foisted with an exorbitant lia tant liability. It is contended that in thi , the t in this short view of the matter, the eviction orde n order could not have been passed by sed by both the Authorities below. 6. In support, learned counsel fo elies sel for the petitioner-tenant relies upon judgm judgments in (i) Anjali Foundation er ion vs. Anil Mehra, Law Finder Doc Id # 26 # 2678688; (ii) Taninder Tandon V ur, on Vs. Dr. Anjan Parkash Kaur, Law Finder nder Doc Id #658347; (iii) Naresh ar esh Kumar vs. Mahender Kumar Jain along long with other connected petitio # etition, Law Finder Doc Id # 2093986; (iv 6; (iv) Mukesh Agrawal vs. Smt. C er t. Chanchal Gupta, Law Finder Doc Id # 16 1690198 and (v) Dalip Kaur Brar ib Brar vs. M/s Guru Granth Sahib Sewa Missio ission (Regd.) and Anr., Law Finde inder Doc Id # 846086. RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.05 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-2053-20 2025 (O&M) -4- 7. No other argument has been raised by learned counsel for the petitione titioner. 8. I have heard learned counsel fo nsel for the petitioner and perused the case file se file in great detail. 9. I find no merit in the submissio f the missions advanced on behalf of the petitioner-ten tenant. It is the admitted fact on r rned ct on record that earlier, the learned Rent Contro ontroller, vide order dated 02.05.2017 ssed 5.2017 (Annexure P-1) had assessed the provision ovisional rent @ ₹1,000/- per month w i.e. onth w.e.f. January 1992 till date i.e. for 305 mon onths. As such the arrears of ren oner of rent to be paid by the petitioner was calculat alculated to be ₹5,39,325/-. Thereafte d an ereafter, the petitioner had filed an appeal befor l before the learned Appellate Authori vide uthority, which was dismissed vide order dated dated 21.08.2017 (Annexure P-2). Fee oner Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner assailed the d the aforesaid orders dated 02.05.201 ures 05.2017 and 21.08.2017 (Annexures P-1 and P- -2, respectively) before this Cou . s Court by way of CR-6390-2017. The said rev
Decision
id revision petition was disposed of b ated ed of by this Court vide order dated 19.09.2017 2017 (Annexure P-3),and the matter the matter was reminded back to the learned App d Appellate Authority as follows: “Aggrieved by the ord er, order of the Rent Controller, Khamanon, the tenant carried te rried an appeal to the Appellate Authority, Fatehgarh Sahib, w e. ib, who has dismissed the same. The averments in Para.7 of t en of the grounds of appeal taken before the Appellate Authority he ority was that earlier rent at the rate of `600/- per month was he was deposited up to 2001 in the account of the landlord Bad he Badan Singh maintained in the Punjab & Sind Bank, Khamano is manon. Thereafter, the position is not clear and remains subject re ject to proof by evidence before and after 2001 to confirm trans by transfers of money. It is argued by the learned counsel for the as the tenant that this aspect as RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.05 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-2053-20 2025 (O&M) -5- contained in Para.7 of the g he grounds of appeal has been ignored by the Appellate Auth al Authority while passing the final order affirming the order of the f the Rent Controller. The Appellate Authority as rity cannot be blamed for this, as it was for the tenant to prod at produce the Bank statements at proper stage to show that re od t rent was paid for the period claimed. If there was laxity on ot y on the part of the tenant in not backing up the pleadings with p ry ith proof and if such documentary proof exists on bank record, the he , then to the mind of the Court the ends of justice may demand be and that the matter should be remitted for reconsidered by by by the Appellate Authority by giving an opportunity to th nk o the tenant to produce bank and officials/bank statements and nt the photocopies of rent payment receipts through bank in banking transactions which are in his possession, so that the nd the same can be matched and compared with the transactions ok tions on the original bankers book in case they have not been weed weeded out. Having heard learned is ned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view if view that justice may be served if the matter is remanded and the ed d the Appellate Court is requested to pass a fresh order as expedit ng editiously as possible after taking into consideration the new ma ed material which may be placed before it by both the parties up ng s upon remand and after hearing them take a call on the evidence ence. Disposed of accordingly gly”. 10. As such, vide order dated 19. the ed 19.09.2017 (Annexure P-3), the matter was r was remanded back to the learned Ap sion ed Appellate Authority for decision afresh by tak by taking into consideration any new aced y new material which may be placed before it. P it. Pursuant to the same, the learn vide e learned Appellate Authority vide order dated dated 11.01.2018 (Annexure P-4), had atter 4), had further remanded the matter back to the l o the learned Rent Controller in the fol the following terms: – RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.05 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-2053-20 2025 (O&M) -6- “14. After hearing the learne nd arned counsel for the parties and after going through the recor he ecord of the case including the various vouchers placed on rec is n record by the tenant before this Court, this Court is of the co ew e confirmed and considered view that the stage of the case when as hen the order dated 2.5.2017 was passed by the learned Rent be Rent Controller requires to be revisited by the Rent Controlle se roller for which purpose the case stands remanded to the learne ter arned Rent Controller, who after taking into consideration the v Q, the vouchers Mark A to Mark Q, shall made a fresh assessme gs ssment of tender. The findings returned by the Rent Controller of oller regarding provisional rate of rent @ Rs.1000/- per month he nth would remain the same. The assessment of actual arrear of to r of rent be made after taking into consideration the vouchers Mar so Mark A to Mark Q, the amount so paid through these vouchers, t nt rs, the period for which the rent remained due. After so making er king a fresh assessment of tender of rent, one effective opportuni to rtunity be granted to the tenant to deposit the arrear of rent in the the court.”(Emphasis added) 11. From a bare reading of the abo rned he above, it is clear that the learned Appellate A late Authority had duly considered an ence ered and found that no interference was called f alled for in the provisional rent as a ent t as assessed by the learned Rent Controller ller @ ₹1,000/- per month. And o tual nd only an assessment of actual arrears of ren of rent was required to be made on th to e on the basis of vouchers, if any, to be supplied plied by the petitioner or the respo t of respondent. As such, argument of learned cou counsel for the petitioner to the no to the effect that in appeal, no consideration eration was afforded by the Appellate onal pellate Authority to the provisional rent as asses assessed by the Rent Controller, is mi is misfounded. 12. In compliance, the learned Re the ed Rent Controller has passed the order dated dated 04.10.2023 (Annexure P-5) tak the taking note of the fact that the petitioner ha ner had produced only photocopies to opies of the vouchers Mark A to RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.05 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-2053-20 2025 (O&M) -7- Mark Q as as per which an amount of ₹12, the ₹12,700/– had been paid by the petitioner to ner towards rent since 1992. It is spe rder is specifically noticed in the order dated 04.10 04.10.2023 (Annexure P-5) that ‘th to ‘the respondent has failed to produce on on record these Original Voucher of chers despite numerous orders of this Court f urt for producing the same on file of file and lastly, for compliance of Orders of L of Ld. Appellate Authority for con he considering these vouchers, the original file file of Ld. Appellate Authority has rd has been summoned from Record Room to c to consider the said vouchers fo of rs for the limited purposes of calculating ing the arrears for the limited p al ed purposes of the Provisional Assessment ent of Rent, in the absence of prod rs production of Original Vouchers before this C his Court’. 13. Nonetheless, the learned Rent said Rent Controller deducted the said amount of of ₹12,700/– and assessed the arrea 6.50 arrears of rent to be ₹7,21,026.50 paisa (@₹1,0 1,000/- x 381 months) i.e. w.e.f. 0 he f. 01.01.1992 to 30.09.2023. The aforesaid ord aid order (Annexure P-5) was challen fore challenged by the petitioner before the Appellat ppellate Authority; and vide impugned , the pugned order dated 25.03.2025, the appeal of the issed. of the petitioner has been dismissed. 14. Furthermore, even the conduc ires conduct of the petitioner requires mention ina inasmuch as vide order dated 04. ed 04.10.2023 (Annexure P-5), the learned Rent d Rent Controller in accordance with tive with law had granted one effective tunity opportunity to the petitioner ‘for tendering ten ed the aforementioned provisionally nally Assessed Rent Amount on 2 t to n 26.10.2023’. It is pertinent to mention here n here that on 26.10.2023the learned on arned Rent Controller was to be on leave; and th and the file was taken up on 25.10.20 atter 5.10.2023, on which date the matter stood adjour adjourned to 02.11.2023 for conductin ious ducting proceedings as per previous order. On 02 On 02.11.2023, following order was p was passed by the Rent Controller: RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.05 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-2053-20 2025 (O&M) -8- “Today, the case was fix nt s fixed for payment/tender of rent by tenant which was provisiona de ionally assessed by this court vide its previous order dated: 04.10. or 4.10.2023. But the Ld. Counsel for the respondent submitted tha to that respondent was aware to tender the rent but was neither or ither appeared to tender rent nor given any instruction to him qua 15 qua the same. It is already 04:15 PM now and till now nothing by ing has been paid or tendered by tenant/respondent today. Acco ely Accordingly, vide my separately passed detailed order of the eve on e even date, the ejectment petition is allowed and the ejectment o nst nt order has been passed against the respondent/tenant with costs costs. Memo of costs be prepared. Any application, if pend er pending in this case, was neither brought to the notice of the co or e court nor argued upon and nor pressed by any of the part ch parties. Accordingly, any such application, if pending, also st of so stands disposed off in terms of final order on this petition. File be consigned to ue to the record room after due compliance.” 15. Thus, the eviction order came to oted ame to be passed in the above noted circumstance stances. 16. Much hue and cry has been ma r the en made by learned counsel for the petitioner th ner that the Provisional Rent as asses low s assessed by the Authorities below was exorbita xorbitant; as also that in appeal no re the no re-assessment was made by the Appellate A Authority; and also no finding h rned ding has been given by the learned Appellate A late Authority as to whether the Pr erly the Provisional Rent was properly assessed by t ed by the learned Rent Controller or no r or not in the impugned orders. 17. In find no merit in the said cont l for id contentions of learned counsel for the petitione titioner for the reasons noted above. It n in It is well entrenched position in law as enunc enunciated by the Hon’ble Apex Cou in ex Court in a landmark judgment in Rakesh Wa Wadhawan vs. M/s. Jagdamba I aw ba Industrial Corporation, Law RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.05 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-2053-20 2025 (O&M) -9- Finder Doc Doc Id # 3207, wherein it is unam and unambiguously, unequivocally and categorically rically held as under:- “30. To sum up, our conclusio lusions are : 1. In Section 13(2)(i) provis he roviso, the words 'assessed by the Controller' qualify not mere of merely the words 'the cost of application' but the entire prec .e. preceding part of the sentence i.e. 'the arrears of rent and interest on erest at six per cent per annum on such arrears together with the c the cost of application'. 2. The proviso to Section 1 an ion 13(2)(i) of East Punjab Urban Restriction Act, 1949 casts an o to an obligation on the Controller to make an assessment of (i) arrea on arrears of rent, (ii) the interest on such arrears, and (iii) the c en e cost of application and then quantify by way of an interi he nterim or provisional order the amount which the tenant must p ate ust pay or tender on the 'first date of hearing' after the passing o nt' ing of such order of 'assessment' by the Controller so as to sa he to satisfy the requirement of the proviso. 3. Of necessity, 'the dat date of first hearing of he the application' would mean the d of the date falling after the date of such order by Controller. 4. On the failure of the ng the tenant to comply, nothing remains to be done and an ord If order for eviction shall follow. If the tenant makes compliance, for ce, the inquiry shall continue for finally adjudicating upon the di nt he dispute as to the arrears of rent in the light of the contending rd ing pleas raised by the landlord and the tenant before the Contr ontroller. 5. If the final adjudicatio at cation by the Controller be at variance with his interim or pr er r provisional order passed under the proviso, one of the followi de llowing two orders may be made depending on the facts situat he ituation of a given case. If the amount deposited by the tenan he nant is found to be in excess, the Controller may direct a refun he efund. If on the other hand, the amount deposited by the tena or tenant is found to be short or RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.05 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-2053-20 2025 (O&M) -10- deficient, the Controller may er may pass a conditional order directing tenant to place the l he the landlord in possession of the premises by giving a reasonabl ng nable time to the tenant for paying or tendering the deficit amount all ount, failing which alone he shall be liable to be evicted. Com m ompliance shall save him from eviction. 6. While exercising discreti an cretion for affording the tenant an opportunity of making good th nt d the deficit, one of the relevant factors to be taken into cons ler consideration by the Controller would be, whether the tenant ith nant has paid or tendered with substantial regularity the rent th rent falling due month by month during the pendency of the proc proceedings.” (Emphasis added) 18. Admittedly, in the present case d to nt case, the petitioner has failed to comply with y with/make payment of the provisi the rovisional rent as assessed by the learned Rent Rent Controller and affirmed by the rity. by the learned Appellate Authority. As such, as ch, as per the above pronouncement, oner ment, the eviction of the petitioner shall follow ollow without further consideration. 19. On the contrary, it has been sub l for en submitted by learned counsel for the petitione titioner before this Court that the peti he petitioner-tenant is not in arrears of rent since t since the year 1992; and arrears of ince ears of rent are payable only since 2017. On a q a query by this Court that as to w paid o why the rent has not been paid for so many many years, learned counsel for the p that r the petitioner repeatedly states that the petitione titioner is ‘ready to pay the rent’. 20. The petitioner can derive no pon e no benefit from the relied upon judgments a ents as the same are distinguishab The uishable on facts and law. The undisputed uted legal position in this regard is t the rd is that it is incumbent upon the tenant to de to deposit the arrears of rent as p the t as provisionally assessed by the RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.05 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-2053-20 2025 (O&M) -11- learned Ren d Rent Controller ‘on the first date o the ate of hearing’ failing which the tenant is liab is liable to the evicted forthwith from from the demised premises. 21. In view of the discussion made n made here-in-above, the present revision peti n petition, being meritless, is dismisse smissed. 22. Pending application(s), if any, s any, shall also stand disposed of. 2025 03.04.2025 rishu ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2025.04.05 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.