Surinder Pal Verma and Another Vs Ravi Dutt — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Surinder Pal Verma and Another Vs Ravi Dutt — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the order of the learned Rent Controller dated 02.01.2025 declining provisional assessment of rent (the tenant having already paid rent upto 31.12.2024 as per the rent note), as affirmed by the Appellate Authority, suffered from any illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error calling for interference in revision. +1 more

Court's answer

There is no illegality or perversity in the findings recorded by the Appellate Authority; the findings are well reasoned and no jurisdictional error was committed, so the revision petition deserved dismissal.

Ratio / Principle

No jurisdictional error was committed: provisional assessment of rent is only for the purposes of tendering rent on the first date of hearing in order to avoid ejectment; where rent upto 31.12.2024 has already been paid as per the rent note executed between the parties, the validity of the tender made would be adjudged at the time of final disposal of the ejectment petition, and if the tender is found short, the respondent-tenant would be asked to make good the deficiency as per the law laid down in Rakesh Wadhawan, 2002 (5) SCC 440.

Key takeaways

When the rent has been paid up-to-date as per the rent note, there is no need for provisional assessment of the rent; both the Courts below rightly so concluded.ratio¶18
In this case there was no question of assessing fair rent; only provisional rent was required to be assessed by the learned Rent Controller on the first date of hearing, as per Rakesh Wadhawan's case (supra).ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Rent Control – Provisional assessment of rent – Petitioners, claiming to be landlords, sought ejectment of the respondent-tenant on grounds of arrears of rent (Rs. 1,07,807/- upto September, 2017), nuisance and personal necessity; ejectment petition contested by written reply – During pendency, learned Rent Controller vide order dated 02.01.2025 declined provisional assessment of rent since the tenant had already paid rent from 01.09.2007 to 31.12.2024 (Rs. 5,57,683/-) as per the rent note – Appeal dismissed by the Appellate Authority, Panchkula vide order dated 21.02.2025, which categorically recorded that the matter was not a petition under Section 4 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 – Held (Virinder Aggarwal, J., oral): provisional assessment of rent is only for tendering rent on the first date of hearing to avoid ejectment; where rent stands paid upto date as per the rent note, no provisional assessment is needed; validity of the tender falls for adjudication at final disposal of the ejectment petition and any deficiency in tender can then be made good by the tenant, as per Rakesh Wadhawan v. M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corporation, 2002 (5) SCC 440; there being no question of assessing fair rent, only provisional rent was in play – No illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error in the orders of the authorities below – Revision petition dismissed.

(245)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CR-1611-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 12.08.2025

Surinder Pal Verma and another

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

Ravi Dutt

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL

Present:Ms. Monika Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioners. * * * *

VIRINDER AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL)

The petitioners-revisionists have filed this revision petition claiming themselves to be landlords of the premises in dispute on the ground that the respondent-tenant is in arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 1,07,807/- upto September, 2017. He is creating nuisance. The premises is required for having the personal necessity.

The ejectment petition was contested by the respondent-tenant by filing written reply and during the pendency of the ejectment petition, learned Rent Controller vide order dated 02.01.2025 has opined that since the respondent-tenant has paid the rent from 01.09.2007 to 31.12.2024 to the tune of Rs. 5,57,683/-, there is no need to assess the rent as rent has been paid as per rent note.

The order was challenged in appeal before the Appellate Authority, Panchkula. The Appellate Authority finding no merits in the claim of the petitioners dismissed the appeal vide impugned order dated 21.02.2025. 4. Aggrieved by the orders so passed, the present revision petition has been filed.

AMODH SHARMA 2025.08.13 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement

CR-1611-2025 (O&M)

-2-

Both the authorities below have recorded a finding that when the rent was paid up-to-date as per the rent note, there is no need for provisional assessment of the rent and the Appellate Authority has categorically recorded a finding that it is not a petition under Section 4 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973. A perusal of the impugned order shows that there is no illegality or perversity in the findings recorded by the Appellate Authority. The findings recorded by the Appellate Authority are well reasoned. No jurisdictional error has been committed as provisional assessment of rent is only for the purposes of tendering the rent on first date of hearing in order to avoid ejectment. When rent upto 31.12.2024 has already been paid as per rent note executed between the parties, the validity of the tender made would be adjudged at the time of final disposal of the ejectment petition and if it is found that tender of rent is short, then as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Rakesh Wadhawan and others Vs M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corporation and others, 2002 (5) SCC 440, the respondent-tenant would be asked to make good deficiency in tender. In this case, there is no question of assessing fair rent. Only provisional rent was required to be assessed by the learned Rent Controller on the first date of hearing as per Rakesh Wadhawan’s case (supra) and both the Courts below have rightly concluded that when the rent has been paid up-to-date, there is no need for provisional assessment of the rent.

As such, finding no perversity in the order so passed, the revision petition is dismissed.

(VIRINDER AGGARWAL)

JUDGE

12.08.2025

Amodh Sharma

Whether speaking/reasoned	Yes/No
Whether reportable	Yes/No

AMODH SHARMA 2025.08.13 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement