RANJIT KUMAR Vs. AMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this civil revision petition, orders dated 27.4.2006, 25.11.2009 and 19.12.2013 (Annexures P -2, P -3 and P -5 respectively) passed by the Rent Controller, Kurukshetra, whereby application of the petitioner -tenant for setting aside the order whereby he had been proceeded against ex -parte as also for setting aside the ex -parte decree of eviction against him was dismissed and also for setting aside order (Annexure P -6) dated 29.4.2014 passed by the Appellate Authority, Kurukshetra under the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 (for short, the Act), whereby appeal of the petitioner was also dismissed, are under challenge.

(2.) IN a petition preferred by the respondent -landlord under Section 13A of the Act, eviction of the petitioner -tenant was sought from the shop in dispute on the ground of non -payment of rent as also on the plea that the premises were lying closed for a continuous period of more than 8 months and were thus, not being put to the intended use. On personal service effected on the petitioner -tenant on 23.3.2006 (Annexure P -1), his non -appearance had resulted in ex -parte order against him on the date fixed for his appearance i.e. on 27.4.2006 (Annexure P -2). After appreciating evidence led by the respondent -landlord to substantiate his claim in the petition, ex -parte eviction order was passed against the petitioner -tenant on 25.11.2009 (Annexure P -3). Application (Annexure P -4) for setting aside both ex -parte orders i.e. Annexures P -2 and P -3 was moved by the petitioner -tenant on the ground that he was never served and report of his service was forged and procured one. The application was dismissed on 19.12.2013 (Annexure P -5). The appeal preferred by the petitioner -tenant was also dismissed on 29.4.2014 (Annexure P -6).

(3.) HEARING has been provided to the counsel for the petitioner while going through the paper book.