MAN GAT RAI Vs. VED PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS case raises a novel question. In an eviction application under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, by the time there was the first date of hearing, there was a stay order from the High Court which the Rent Controller interpreted as an order staving the proceedings in the eviction application before him. The Appellate Authority now points out that the stay order did not really concern proceedings in the eviction application. The payment by the tenant, according to the proviso to clause (i) of sub -section (2) of section 13 of the Act, was made not on the first date of hearing but on a subsequent date, by which date the stay order had come to be vacated because the Civil Revision, in which the stay order had been obtained, had been dismissed. The Rent Controller as also the Appellate Authority have been of the opinion that in the circumstances of this case the first date of hearing of the eviction application should not be taken as it actually was but should be taken to be the date on which the payment was made by the tenant after the vacation of the stay order, consequent upon the dismissal of the revision application in which the stay order had been obtained. So they have dismissed the landlord's application for eviction of the tenant, the only ground in the application having been non -payment of arrears of rent.

(2.) AS I have said, the question raised is somewhat novel, for I have been under the impression that the first hearing in such an application is the first date when it comes before the Court and there is nothing which takes away the character of such hearing. If this was the correct approach, then the decisions of the authorities below cannot possibly be maintained. But I would not give a final opinion in this case as I think this is a matter which should be decided at least by a Division Bench. So this case will now be listed before a Division bench before the first week of September 1968 is out. Citing Reference:

(3.) (31st January, 1969). -This Civil Revision 29 of 1967 by the landlord is directed against an order, dated December 5, 1966, of the Appellate Authority, Sangrur. It arises of the following circumstances: