IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 06.02.2026 M/s. Headmaster Ludhiana Salon and Spa Pvt. Ltd., and another ...Petitioner(s)

Vs.

Mrs. Shivdeep Braich and others ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Aayush Gupta, Advocate and Ms. Shalini Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

Dr. Puneet Kaur Sekhon, Senior Advocate with Ms. Dilreet Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.1.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India has been filed by the tenants against the order dated 26.11.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority, Ludhiana, whereby appeal bearing RA No. 155 of 2024 filed by respondent No.1 challenging the order of provisional assessment of rent, has been allowed; and provisional rent as assessed by the Rent Controller @ ₹5,00,000/- per month plus GST, has been set aside.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No.1/landlord had filed an eviction petition/Rent Petition No.526 of 2023 dated 15.05.2023 (Annexure P-1) under Section 20 of The Punjab Rent Act, 1995 against the petitioners/tenants No. 3, 5 and others. Petitioners had filed their written statement (Annexure P-2) in March 2024; to which landlord had filed rejoinder dated 18.04.2024 (Annexure P-3). Vide order dated 19.07.2024 (Annexure P-4), Rent Controller had directed the petitioners to pay provisional rent @ Rs. 5 lacs per month plus GST as follows: -

“……Hence, at this stage, this Rent Authority fix the interim rent to be paid by the respondents to the petitioner at the rate of Rs.5,94,000/- per month including GST etc. as shown as under:-

Rent @ Rs.5,94,000/- for the month of August 2023 to July

2024 = Rs.5,94,000/- X 12 (Months) = Rs.71,28,000/-.

12. Hence, in view of the above, let for payment of interim rent Rs. 71,28,000/- (Rupees Seventy One Lakhs and Twenty Eight Thousand Only) to come upon 17.08.2024.”

3. Against the abovesaid order, respondent No.1/landlord had filed an Appeal before the Appellate Authority; whereby vide impugned order dated 26.11.2024, petitioners have been directed to pay enhanced rent @ of Rs.6,50,000/- per month plus GST.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners/tenants submits that in compliance of the order dated 19.07.2024 passed by the Rent Controller, petitioners had duly cleared the arrears of rent to the tune of Rs.65,23,932/- vide Demand Draft dated 16.08.2024 (Annexure P-5). It is submitted that vide the impugned order, the petitioners have been directed to pay enhanced rate of Rs.6,50,000/- per month plus GST on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter referred to as “MOU”) dated 02.04.2022 (Annexure P-7). Learned counsel contends that first and foremost, the said MOU is yet to be proven in accordance with law before the Rent Controller as the Rent Petition is still pending. It is submitted that moreover, after entering into the MOU, the parties had come to an oral settlement, as per which, the petitioners were required to pay the same rate of rent i.e. Rs.5 lacs per month plus GST. Learned counsel points out that the said fact has been admitted by the landlord in the rejoinder dated 18.04.2024 (Annexure P-3) to the effect that the respondent No.1 has been accepting rent @ Rs.5 lacs as per advise of Chartered Accountant so as to meet the probable objections from the Department. In the said rejoinder, respondent No.1 has also admitted that for the last 12 months she had been receiving rent @ Rs. 5 lacs per month plus GST. It is contended that for this reason as well, the Appellate Authority misled itself with regard to rate of rent agreed between the parties while holding that the written document supersedes any oral settlement between the parties. Learned counsel submits that in holding as above, the Appellate Authority had also failed to properly consider the invoices from 01.04.2022 to 01.03.2023 (Annexure P-8) which show that rent was being paid @ Rs.5 lacs per month plus GST. It is submitted that therefo