SHEO NARAIN Vs. SHER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 4th November, 1976 dismissing the revision petition filed by the appellant before the High Court.

(2.) This case has rather a chequered career and travelled through various stages and finally when it came to the High Court the case was remanded and after remand another revision petition was filed before the High Court which was heard by a single Judge who referred it to a Division Bench as in his opinion a substantial question of law was involved in the case. When the case went before the Division Bench consisting of Pandit and B. S. Dhillon, JJ. the two Judges differed from each other and the case was referred to a third Judge, namely, Mittal, J. who agreed with Pandit, J. and dismissed the petition. Hence this appeal.

(3.) In order to understand the point of law involved in this case, it may be necessary to give a brief re'sume' of the facts leading to the appeal. It appears that the respondent-defendant was a tenant of a shop belonging to one Sher Singh and was situated in Gurgaon Cantonment. Sher Singh gave an application on 21-3-1967 under the provisions of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the defendant-respondent for eviction from the shop on the ground that he had defaulted in payment of the rent and arrears for the period 9-11-1965 to 8-3-1967. Notice of the petition was also filed by the applicant on the 22nd March, 1967 and was actually served on the defendant on 22nd April, 1967. On the 29th April, 1967 the defendant made an application before the Senior Sub-Judge who was also the Rent Controller for depositing a sum of Rupees 179.48 being the rent along with interest due. The amount was however deposited before the Rent Controller on the 4th May, 1967. It appears that the first date of the hearing of the application was 11th May, 1967 on which date the Rent Controller made the following order: