BISHAN SARUP Vs. DR. INDERJIT SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the appellate order of the Appellate Authority under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act. The only question for consideration is, whether the tender made by the petitioner on 25.7.1973 was valid. That would depend on whether 25.7.1973 was the date of first hearing of the petition. The case was first posted to 11.6.1973 on which date the petitioner appeared before the Rent Controller. He made a representation that he had not received a copy of the petition alongwith the summons. He was, therefore, given a copy of summons. He did not appear on the dated to which the petition was adjourned. He was adjudged ex parte. On the next hearing i.e. on 25.7.1973 he appeared and filed a petition to set aside the order adjudging him ex parte. That was done. Then he tendered the arrears of rent etc. In the course of his evidence, however, he admitted in the very first sentence in a cross-examination that he had received a copy of the petition along with the summons. It is thus clear that he had earlier made a misrepresentation to the Court when he said that he had not received a copy of the petition. The finding of the lower Appellate Court was that he made a misrepresentation on 16.7.1973 that he had not received a copy of the petition although he had already received the same, 16.7.1973 was therefore, the first date of hearing. Since the petitioner did not make the tender on 16.7.1973, the lower Courts were right in ordering eviction. The civil revision is, therefore, dismissed with costs.