AMARJIT SINGH BHATIA Vs. PREM RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated 15.09.2010 (Annexure P1), whereby the eviction petition was allowed by the Rent Controller, Yamunanagar on account of the fact that the provisional rent, as assessed on 29.05.2008, had not been deposited. The appeal filed before the Appellate Authority was dismissed on 02.05.2013. Resultantly, the present revision petition has been filed.

(2.) A perusal of the paper-book would go on to show that in the application for ejectment on the ground of non-payment of rent, the Rent Controller had assessed the provisional rent at the cost of Rs. 24000.00, as per the law laid down in Rakesh Wadhawan & others Vs. Jagdamba Industrial Corporation & others 2002 (5) SCC 440 and adjourned the case to 17.07.2008 but the tenant failed to make the payment. The Rent Controller, keeping in mind the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in Rajan @ Raj Kumar Vs. Rakesh Kumar 2010 (2) PLR 201 directed eviction by noticing that the order dated 29.05.2008 has become final. The appeal was also dismissed by taking into account the other judgments of this Court on the same issue, namely, Rajesh Thakur & others Vs. Jangi Lal 2011 (3) RCR (Civil) 312, Bachan Singh Vs. Yadvinder Kumar 2011 (3) RCR (Civil) 747, Hariender Kaur Vs. Sharan Gurdev Singh 2008 (2) RCR (Civil) 183 and Chand Kumar Ahuja Vs. Gurdarshan Singh Gill 2012 (3) Civil Court Cases 196.

(3.) The dispute in question has been settled, beyond a pale of controversy, since the Division Bench of this Court in Rajan's case (supra) held that once there is a failure to deposit the rent assessed, nothing is to be done and eviction has to follow. Relevant observations read as under: