JUDGMENT

Anil Kshetarpal, J. (Oral) - The tenant's application for setting aside ex parte eviction order has been dismissed.

2. Admittedly, the petitioner did receive the notice for service of summons on 11.08.2021. On his non-appearance, ex parte proceedings were ordered on 20.09.2021 and thereafter, an ex parte decree was passed. The petitioner claims that it remained under a confusion as a similarly titled proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, were also pending. It is further submitted that the summons were not accompanied by a copy of the petition.

3. The Court has noticed that the petitioner has not paid arrears of rent to the tune of Rs.40,00,000/-, approximately. The petitioner took the premises on rent at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per month which was liable to be increase as per determined percentage every year. The petitioner did receive the summons. The summons were issued to the petitioner by Civil Judge, Junior Division, Chandigarh. The summons in a criminal complaint are issued by the Judicial Magistrate.

4. There is a ex parte decree for eviction. The Rent Controller, on appreciation of material, has recorded as many as five reasons to dis