Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Alka Sarin, J.
Satnam Singh – Appellant
Versus
Amarjit Kaur & Ors. – Respondents
CR No. 2156 of 2022 (O&M)
Decided On : 30-11-2022
Non-payment of Rent - East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 - Section 13 - [13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949] - The court discussed the provisions of Section 13 of the Rent Act, emphasizing the obligation of the tenant to tender the arrears of rent as determined by the Rent Controller on the next date of hearing. The court highlighted that the Rent Controller has no jurisdiction to extend the period for tendering the arrears of rent provisionally assessed and emphasized that failure to comply with the payment would lead to an order of eviction against the tenant.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent-landlord filed a petition for ejectment under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, seeking eviction of the petitioner-tenant on grounds of non-payment of rent. The Rent Controller provisionally assessed the arrears of rent and ordered the petitioner-tenant to make the payment on a specified date. The petitioner-tenant failed to tender the assessed amount, leading to an application for ordering ejectment by the landlord.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner-tenant failed to comply with the payment of provisionally assessed arrears of rent, and the Rent Controller was within jurisdiction to order the eviction of the tenant. The court emphasized the obligation of the tenant to tender the arrears of rent as determined by the Rent Controller on the next date of hearing.
Issues: The issues revolved around the petitioner-tenant's failure to comply with the payment of provisionally assessed arrears of rent and the jurisdiction of the Rent Controller to extend the period for tendering the arrears of rent.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Rent Controller has no jurisdiction to extend the period for tendering the provisionally assessed arrears of rent, and failure to comply with the payment would lead to an order of eviction against the tenant.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the revision petition, emphasizing that the impugned orders passed by the authorities below did not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.
JUDGMENT
Alka Sarin, J. - The present revision petition has been filed impugning the order dated 11.04.2019 passed by the Rent Controller, Tarn Taran and order dated 28.03.2022 passed by the Appellate Authority, Tarn Taran whereby the eviction of the petitioner-tenant has been ordered on account of non-payment of rent.
2. The brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the respondent-landlord filed a petition for ejectment under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rent Act') seeking eviction of the petitioner-tenant from the premises in dispute bearing MC No.B2-19, Amritsar Road, Tarn Taran on inter-alia the grounds of non-payment of rent and personal bonafide necessity. The Rent Controller, vide order dated 11.01.2018, provisionally assessed the arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.300/- per month w.e.f. 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2017 amounting to Rs.14,400/- alongwith interest of Rs.2,081/- and costs of Rs.1000/- totaling Rs.17,481/- which was ordered to be paid by the petitioner-tenant to the landlord-respondent on 19.02.2018 which was to be considered as the first date of hearing. On 19.02.2018 the petitioner-tenant did not tender the amount assessed by the Rent Controller and his counsel made a statement that the payment of rent as assessed shall be made on the next date. This was recorded in the order dated 19.02.2018 passed by the Rent Controller and the case was adjourned to 05.03.2018 for payment. On 05.03.2018 the respondent-landlord filed an application before the Rent Controller for ordering ejectment of the petitioner-tenant for non-compliance of order dated 11.01.2018. During the pendency of the said application, the respondent-landlord filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority against the order dated 19.02.2018 passed by the Rent Controller extending the date for depositing the provisional rent. The Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal vide it's order dated 29.10.2018. The respondent-landlord filed CR-30-2019 before this Court. That since the application of the respondentlandlord for ordering ejectment of the petitioner-tenant for non-compliance of order dated 11.01.2018 was still pending before the Rent Controller, vide order dated 03.04.2019 this Court disposed off CR-30-2019 by directing the Rent Controller to decide the said application.
3. Vide order dated 11.04.2019 the Rent Controller accepted the application and ordered ejectment of the tenant-petitioner holding inter-alia 'Therefore, the amount of rent fixed by the Court having not been paid on the date fixed and the Court extending the date for this purpose without assigning of any reason is not valid. Therefore, in such like circumstances and order passed by this Court extending the time of payment of rent from 19.02.2018 to 05.03.2018 suffers from a patent violation of settled provisions of law and hence is not valid. Accordingly, the application for ordering the ejectment of the respondent No.1/tenant for non-compliance of the order dated 11.01.2018 filed by the applicants-landlords is allowed and the tenant-respondent is ordered to be evicted ... '. The petitioner-tenant filed an appeal against the order dated 11.04.2019 which appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 28.03.2022. Hence, the present civil revision.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant has contended that the authorities below have erred in law in ordering the eviction of the petitionertenant on the ground of non-payment of rent. It is contended that the arrears of rent as assessed by the Rent Controller on 11.01.2018 could not be tendered on the next date i.e. 19.02.2018 as Jaswant Singh, the tenant in the adjoining shop, suffered a heart attack on 19.02.2018 and he had to be rushed to the hospital in Jalandhar for treatment and the petitioner-tenant had accompanied him there and that is why on 19.02.2018 the counsel for the petitioner-tenant had requested the Rent Controller for extension of
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Rent Controller has no jurisdiction to extend the period for tendering the provisionally assessed arrears of rent, and failure to comply w....
The tenant is obligated to make timely payments of arrears of rent as determined by the Rent Controller/Appellate Authority, and failure to do so can lead to eviction.
The failure of a tenant to comply with a Rent Controller's order for provisional rent assessment necessitates eviction, as the Controller has no jurisdiction to extend the payment period.
Court confirms that a tenant's good faith intent to pay addresses eviction liability if the Rent Controller fails to accurately assess due rent, emphasizing fair enforcement of the law.
The tenant must deposit the provisional rent as assessed by the Rent Controller on the first date of hearing, and failure to do so warrants an ejectment order.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
