RAJESH ALIAS BINTI Vs. LAL CHAND CHHABRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition has been filed on behalf of Munshi Ram the original tenant and the alleged sub-tenants against the order of the appellant authority by which they have been ordered to be ejected from the premises in dispute.

(2.) THE landlord filed an application for eviction on the ground that the premises in dispute were let out to Munshi Ram and that he has sub-let the same to Mathura Dass and Har Narain. The other ground taken by the landlord was the non-payment of the rent. The defence of Munshi Ram was that he has got nothing to do with the premises and that Mathura Dass and Har Narain were the direct tenants of the demised premises. Since Munshi Ram did not claim to be the tenant of the demised premises, no arrears of rent were tendered before the learned Rent Controller on the first date of hearing. The tender made on behalf of Mathura Dass and Har Narain was not accepted by the landlord. On the pleas of the parties, the following issues were framed;

(3.) NO other point has been raised before me. In view of the afore-mentioned discussion, there is in force in the revision petition and the same is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs. The petitioners are entitled to 3 months' time to vacate the premises under the provisions of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973. However, the counsel for the landlord has agreed to the grant of 6 months' time. Counsel for the petitioners has undertaken that the vacant possession of the demised premises will be handed over to the respondent-landlord after the expiry of 6 months' time. However, this undertaking would not affect the rights of the petitioner-tenant to go to Supreme Court.