KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. GURBAX SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against an order of the Appellate Authority allowing an appeal arising out of an execution proceeding.

(2.) A shop situated at Nalagarh was let out by the Respondent to the Petitioner. It appears that the Respondent subsequently applied to the Rent Controller for an order of eviction under Sec. 14(2)(i) of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1971, and on April 30, 1975, the Rent Controller made an order holding that the Petitioner had defaulted in payment of rent and was liable to be evicted. He directed the eviction of the tenant in case the rental arrears were not paid within one month of the date of the order. The Petitioner, taking the month as consisting of 31 days, paid the rent on the 31st day. The Respondent took out execution of the order of eviction. An objection was taken by the Petitioner against the execution proceeding that the rent had been paid within one month as directed by the Rent Controller. The objection was found in order, and accordingly the execution application was dismissed. The Respondent appealed, and the appeal has been allowed by the Appellate Authority by its order dated February 23, 1977. The Appellate Authority has held that the Petitioner should have deposited the arrears of rent within 30 days as envisaged by the second proviso to Sec. 14(2)(ii) of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1971, and that having failed to do so he was liable to be evicted.

(3.) In this revision petition, learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends that the Rent Controller having granted a period of one month to the Petitioner to deposit the rental arrears and the deposit having been made within that period, the Petitioner could not be evicted. It is urged that as the order disposing of the original petition for eviction specified a period of "one month", it was not open to the Appellate Authority to go behind that order in an execution proceeding, and hold that only "30 days" were allowed. I am unable to accept the contention. The second proviso to Sec. 14(2)(i) provides: