JUDGMENT

Alka Sarin, J.

The present revision petition has been preferred against the orders dated 24.09.2018 and 29.10.2018 passed by the Authorities below ordering the ejectment of the tenant-petitioner from the premises in dispute.

2. The brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the respondents filed a petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rent Act') for eviction of the tenant-petitioner from the residential premises described in detail in the ejectment petition. It was averred in the ejectment petition that the landlady-respondent No.1 was the registered owner of a house vide sale deed dated 25.05.1979 and that the premises had been let out to the tenant-petitioner at a monthly rent of Rs.800/- about 25 years ago which, at a later stage, was enhanced to Rs.900/- per month. Respondent No.2 - Sudarshan Bhalla - had been collecting rent from the tenant-petitioner against receipts. The ejectment petition was filed on the ground of arrears of rent from 01.07.2013 and on the ground of bonafide personal necessity. The bonafide personal necessity as stated in the ejectment petition was that the respondents were residing in a small residential house of approximately 3-½ marlas owned by respondent No.2 in a narrow street where there was no facility of parking any automobile. It was further averred that the respondents were both of advance age and always needed either automobile or rickshaw to move out from their house. It was further the case that the total accommodation of their house consisted of one room and a small store on the ground floor and similar accommodation on the first floor where the married son of the respondents was residing with his wife and daughter. It was further the case that the respondents have two other sons and a married daughter who were residing at different places and were frequently visiting the respondents. On notice, the tenant-petitioner appeared and contested the ejectment petition. The relationship of landlord and tenant was admitted. The rate of rent of Rs.900/- per month was also admitted. However, it was stated that the tenant-petitioner was regularly paying the rent, however, no receipts were issued. The Rent Controller provisionally assessed the rent vide order dated 24.08.2018. The said provisional assessment order was passed in the presence of both the counsel. On the same day i.e. 24.08.2018, while passing the order, 24.09.2018 was fixed as the date for payment of the provisional rent as assessed. On 24.09.2018 a short order was passed which reads as under :

"Rent not tendered by the respondent. Arguments heard: Vide my separate detailed order of even date, ejectment order with regard to the demised premises is hereby passed against the respondent and the respondent is directed to hand over the vacant physical possession of the demised premises to the applicants within a period of three months from today failing which the applicants shall be at liberty to get the demised premises vacated through the process of the court. No order as to costs. Memo of costs be prepared and file be consigned to the Judicial Record Room, Ferozepur."

3. Subsequently, the order of ejectment was passed on the same very day i.e. 24.09.2018. It has come on the record that a copy of the order dated 24.08.2018 was applied for by the counsel for the tenant-petitioner on 26.09.2018 which was delivered on 05.10.2018. On 10.10.2018 an appeal was filed before the Appellate Authority challenging the order of ejectment dated 24.09.2018. The appeal was dismissed vide order dated 29.10.2018. Hence,