The Court condoned a 22-day delay in filing a revision petition challenging an eviction order imposed due to rent default. The revision was dismissed, with reliance placed on established authority confirming that ejectment is inevitable upon failure to pay accrued rent.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
���������������������������������������� ��������������
����������������������������� �!�"#$� Date of decision: 24th July, 2013
Jai Pal
� Petitioner
Versus
Sita Rani
� Respondent
����#%�����&�'��#�����(�������)�(��)�#��������
Present: Mr. Nitin Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for the respondent.
��)�(��)�#�������*����!���'$
CM No.7124)CII of 2013
For the reasons mentioned in the application, which his supported by an affidavit of the petitioner, delay of 22 days in filing the revision petition is condoned.
CM stands disposed of.
Civil Revision No.1900 of 2013 (O&M)
In an eviction petition filed by the respondent)landlord, provisional rent was assessed vide order 10.09.2011. There was a default in payment of the said rent and thus, the Rent Controller vide order dated 21.11.2011 ordered eviction of the petitioner from the demised premises.
Singh Rattan Pal 2013.07.25 14:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh
2
������������������������������������
Aggrieved from the aforesaid order of eviction, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority, which was also dismissed.
By filing the instant revision petition, the aforesaid orders of the authorities below have been challenged.
It could not be disputed before this Court that if a tenant fails to pay the arrears of rent as assessed provisionally, then his ejectment is inevitable. Reliance can be placed on a Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in +�,-,��,��,���,-�)./,0�����,1��2�
)./,0& 2010(1) RCR (Rent) 386.
Learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to distinguish the aforesaid judgment.
Dismissed.
�!��)�(��)�#�������$� ������
�.�3��4���� �* ���
Singh Rattan Pal 2013.07.25 14:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether delay of 22 days in filing the revision petition should be condoned.
Whether the order of eviction barring payment of arrears of rent is attracted by the precedents cited.
Jai Pal
Sita Rani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
