IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.-

CR-3822-2017 (O&M)

Reserved on:-19.08.2025 Decided on :- 27.08.2025 Nibha Panda ....Petitioner VERSUS Karanbir Singh & Others ....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present: Mr. R.S.Dhindsa, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Ekta Thakur, Advocate and Ms. Shikha, Advocate for the respondents.

-.-

MANDEEP PANNU J.

1. Present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner-tenant against the impugned order dated 01.10.2015 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh and order dated 24.04.2017 passed by the Appellate Authority, Chandigarh whereby the petitioner has been ordered to be evicted from the demised premises.

Brief Facts

2. The landlords/respondents filed an eviction petition, which was initially decided by the Rent Controller vide order dated 05.09.2014. However, on appeal, the Appellate Authority set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the Rent Controller, Chandigarh, directing it to be decided afresh in accordance with the directions of the Hon’ble High Court passed in CWP No. 7611 of 2009, wherein it was specifically directed that the issue with regard to the payment of rent as well as refund of any excess rent during the pendency of the rent petition be determined.

3. Upon remand, the learned Rent Controller proceeded to hear the matter afresh and, by order dated 01.10.2015, allowed the eviction petition on the ground of non-payment of rent. The respondents/tenants were directed to pay arrears of rent amounting to ₹73,188/- within two months from the date of the order, failing which they were made liable to eviction. Insofar as the ground of personal necessity of the petitioners/landlords was concerned, the respondents/tenants were also directed to vacate the demised premises, consisting of two rooms in House No. 1355, Nagal Basti, Mori Gate, Manimajra, U.T.Chandigarh and hand over vacant possession within two months.

4. Aggrieved by the said order dated 01.10.2015, the tenants filed a review petition under Sections 114 read with Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, before the Rent Controller, Chandigarh seeking review of the said order. The said review petition, however, was dismissed by the learned Rent Controller vide order dated 30.07.2016, on the ground that there was no inherent provision under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, empowering the Rent Controller to review its own order.

5. Feeling aggrieved, the tenants filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority, Chandigarh, The Appellate Authority while maintaining the findings of the Rent Controller, upheld the order dated 01.10.2015 regarding eviction on the ground of personal necessity and dismissed the appeal to that extent. However, on the issue of arrears of rent, the Appellate Authority observed that there was a dispute between the parties regarding payment of excessive rent, which came to be settled by order dated 15.11.2016 passed during pendency of appeal. The Authority held that after such settlement there was no subsisting dispute regarding arrears of rent, and accordingly upheld the ejectment order as legal and valid.

6. Hence, the present civil revision petition.

Submissions of the Petitioner

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner/tenant argued that the Rent Controller wrongly decided the issue of rent and, instead of ordering refund of excess rent, directed the tenants to pay arrears of ₹73,188/-. It was contended that this direction was passed despite the fact that the tenants had already deposited rent as per the assessment order of the Rent Controller during the pendency of the proceedings. This crucial fact, according to learned counsel, was ignored, and consequently, the impugned order dated 01.10.2015 is vitiated. It was further submitted that even though a review petition was filed by the tenants to correct the above error, the same was dismissed mechanically and without proper application of mind.

8. Learned Counsel fo