The main legal point established in the judgment is that the tenant is obligated to make the deposit of the assessed rent within the time fixed by the Rent Controller, and the court clarified that there was no jurisdiction to extend the time for deposit beyond the period already fixed.

Alok Singh, J.

1. Tenant petitioner has invoked revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 15 (5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), challenging the judgment / order dated 01.10.2009 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Ludhiana, as well as judgment / order dated 07.01.2010 passed by the learned Appellate Authority, Ludhiana.

2. The brief facts of the present case are that the landlord respondent has filed eviction petition against the tenant petitioner herein on the ground of arrears of rent contending that tenant is in arrears of rent w.e.f. 01.03.1997 at the rate of Rs. 1920/- per month and at the rate of Rs. 2304/- w.e.f. 1.3.2000.

3. Learned Rent Controller vide order dated 10.09.2009, assessed the provisional rent and directed the tenant to pay Rs. 3,62,259/- on or before adjourned date 01.10.2009. Order dated 10.09.2009 was challenged by way of revision being C.R. No. 5521 of 2009 before this Court, which was directed to be dismissed by this Court vide order dated 25.09.2009. However, liberty was granted to the tenant to approach the Rent Controller for extension of time to tender the arrears of rent, if so permissible in law. After dismissal of the revision petition vide order dated 25.09.2009 by this Court, the tenant petitioner herein moved an application before the learned Rent Controller on 01.10.2009 seeking extension of time to tender the assessed rent. The learned Rent Controller thereafter vide impugned judgment/order dated 01.10.2009 directed the eviction of the tenant on the ground that tenant has failed to make payment in compliance with the provisional assessment order dated 10.09.2009. The judgment/order passed by the learned Rent Controller dated 01.10.2009 was challenged before the learned Appellate Authority being Rent Appeal No.15 dated 15.10.2009 which too was dismissed by the learned Appellate Authority vide judgment dated 07.01.2010. Feeling aggrieved, tenant has invoked revisional jurisdiction by way of present revision petition.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.

5. Mr. Sunil Chadha, learned counsel for the tenant petitioner argued that learned Single Judge of this Court while dismissing the revision vide order dated 25.09.2009 has granted liberty to the tenant to approach the Rent Controller for extension of time to tender the arrears of rent, hence, an application was moved before the learned Rent Controller on 01.10.2009 seeking extension of time to tender the rent which was not decided by the learned Rent Controller and straightway passed the eviction order. Mr. Sunil Chadha, vehemently argued that the learned Rent Controller was duty bound to extend the time to tender the rent as assessed by the Rent Controller. It is further argued by Mr. Sunil Chadha that calculation done by the Rent Controller while passing the provisional assessment rent order dated 10.09.2009, was incorrect while as per the correct calculation amount should have been to the tune of Rs. 3,28,300/- instead of Rs. 3,62,259/-. Mr. Sunil Chadha further stated that correct calculated amount of Rs. 3,28,300/- was deposited before this Court in the shape of demand draft along with Civil Misc. application. No. 5098-CII of 2010, hence, same may be accepted and order of eviction be quashed.

6. Mr. Amit Rawal, learned counsel for the respondent landlord stated that as per the dictum of the Apex Court in the matter of Rakesh Wadhawan v. M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corporation, reported in 1 (2002-2)131 PLR 370 (SC) and as per the dictum of Division Bench of this Court dated 07.01.2010 in Civil Revision No. 3577 of 2006 - Rajan alias Raj Kumar v. Rakesh Kumar, 2 (2010-2)158 PLR 201, if tenant fails to tender the arrears of rent as assessed by the Rent Controller on or before the date fixed by the Rent Controller then order of eviction shall follow and nothing remains to be decided by the Rent Controller. Mr. Rawal furth