PALA RAM Vs. BAL RAJ KAPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts of the case are not very clear from the impugned order. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, an application for eviction was filed against the petitioner by the respondent under the provisions of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, on the ground of non -payment of arrears of rent. Some amount was tendered on the first date of hearing, but the same was held to be short and consequently, the eviction order was passed. That order was challenged in appeal. The appeal was dismissed for default on June 14, 1977. An application was made for setting aside the said order and the restoration of the appeal which has not been disposed of finally so far. During the pendency of the restoration application, an application for stay of dispossession was made which has been dismissed by the Appellate Authority by the impugned order. The same was dismissed as premature on the plea that there was no appeal pending in the Court, and therefore, the application for stay could not be considered. This order, on the face of it, cannot be sustained and is against all canons of justice and fair play. After the appeal had been dismissed for default, the only remedy left to the petitioner was to make an application for setting aside the said order and for restoration of the appeal. It was not for the petitioner to bring the appeal to life and make it pending before the appellate Court till the restoration application had been decided. If during the pendency of the restoration application, dispossession of the petitioner is not stayed, the application itself would be rendered in fructuous and the I petitioner will be forced to suffer irretrievable loss. The impugned order is thus set aside and the dispossession of the petitioner will remain stayed during the pendency of the restoration application.