JUDGMENT

Namit Kumar, J. (Oral)

The instant revision petition has been preferred by the petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 15 (5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short 'the 1949 Act') impugning the order dated 28.04.2023 (Annexure P-6) passed by learned Appellate Authority, Sangrur in Rent Appeal No.4 of 2023 titled as 'Surinder Paul and another v. Shubham Kumar' whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed and the order dated 03.02.2023 (Annexure P-4) passed in Rent Petition No.07 of 2020 titled as 'Shubham Kumar v. Surinder Paul and another' whereby learned Rent Controller, Malerkotla has passed the ejectment order and directed the petitioners to hand over the vacant possession of demised premises to the respondent.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case as pleaded in the petition are that the petitioners/tenants took the shop situated at Raikot Bus Stand, Chappar Road, Ahmedgarh, District Sangrur on rent from earlier co-owner/landlord namely Nirmala Vinayak wife of Late Yashpal Vinayak on the rent of Rs. 2100/- per month w.e.f. 01.06.2003 to 31.08.2003 and executed a rent note dated 06.06.2003. In addition to payment of monthly rent, the petitioners/tenants also agreed to pay all the utility bills. Roof of the shop in dispute remained in possession of the owner. In family partition, the shop in dispute along with other property came into share of father of respondent namely Sanjiv Kumar who vide transfer deed No.479 dated 12.07.2017 transferred the shop in dispute and adjoining shop in favour of the respondent. Hence, respondent-Shubham Kumar is the owner/landlord of the shop in dispute from 12.07.2017. He (Shubham Kumar) has filed the ejectment petition on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent w.e.f. 12.09.2017 @ Rs. 2100/- per month. It was further alleged that the petitioners/tenants are also in arrears of property tax, interest and costs etc. and further that the shop in dispute was required for his bona fide necessity. Vide order dated 20.12.2022, learned Rent Controller, Malerkotla provisionally assessed the rent as follows :-

"Heard on the provisional assessment of rent. In this case, the rate of rent of demised shop is admitted between the parties to be Rs. 2100/- per month. In such a case, the rate of rent for the purpose of provisional assessment of rent is hereby taken to be Rs. 2100/- per month. As far as the period of arrears of rent is concerned, petitioner/landlord has claimed that respondents/tenants are in arrears of rent w.e.f. 12.09.2017 whereas respondents have submitted in their reply that they have paid rent of demised shop till 31.10.2017, however, it is noteworthy that petitioner has himself made statement in the court through his learned counsel that petitioner has received rent till 31.10.2017. Keeping in view the above said circumstances, it is clear that respondents are in arrears of rent from 01.11.2017 till date. As far as house tax/property tax is concerned, as per the rent note dated 06.06.2002, same has to be paid by landlord. Therefore, the provisionally assessed rent is as follows:

3. The arrears of provisional rent were to be paid by the petitioners/tenants to the respondent/landlord to the tune of Rs. 1,51,955/- on 03.02.2023, however, they did not pay the arrears of provisional