IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (286) CR-2788-2024 (O&M) Decided on : 07.04.2025 Umed Singh ……Petitioner Versus Vijay Kumar ……Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL Present: Mr.Ram Kumar Saini, Advocate Mr.Ankit Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Arav Gupta, Advocate, for the respondent. ***** ANIL KSHETARPAL , J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner herein is a tenant who has failed to pay the rent despite specific order passed by the Rent Controller, assessing payable arrears of provisional rent from January, 2016 to March, 2022 to the tune of Rs.1,17,800/-. The petitioner has not paid the rent for a period of more than 3 years before filing of the suit. 2. On 04.04.2025, the following order was passed: “The petitioner herein is a tenant. In this revision petition, the petitioner challenges the correctness of the order of the Rent Controller assessing the provisional rent. The learned counsel representing the respondent draws the attention of the Court to the photographs (Annexure R1) to show that the petitioner has already abandoned the shop which is lying closed. He submits that neither there is any electricity connection nor water connection. The learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the petitioner continues to work in the shop. The address of the shop is House Tax Unit No. 105/12, Jind Road, Hansi, Tehsil Hansi, District Hisar. SAILESH RANJAN 2025.04.08 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (286) CR-2788-2024 (O&M) 2 Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, in order to resolve the controversy, the Presiding Judge of the Court of the Rent Controller is requested to visit the shop today itself and report about its status. The Presiding Judge will submit the report by 07.04.2025, after inquiring into the matter from the neighbours. List on 07.04.2025. The Court Master of this Court is requested to intimate this order to the Presiding Judge of the Court of Rent Controller, forthwith.” 3. The Rent Controller, after visiting the property, has made the following report: “From the statement recorded and from the existing circumstances at the spot, it appears that the shop has not been opened since long as there was no sign of any recent activity at the shop. There was no sign board, displaying the name of the shop, shopkeeper or any contact detail of the shopkeeper. The condition of the exterior (shutters, doors and signage) suggests neglect with visible dust, rust and possible structural wear and tear. No utility connections like electricity, water or gas seem to be in active use. The exterior of the shop further shows extensive damage, with visible cracks on wall and roof and peeling paint. The roof appears weakened with sign of leakage and possible structural instability. The photographs further fortify this. Report is submitted please.” 4. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, there is no scope for interference in the concurrent orders passed by the Courts below. Hence, the present revision petition is dismissed. All pending application(s) also stand disposed of. (ANIL KSHETARPAL) April 7, 2025 JUDGE sailesh Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No SAILESH RANJAN 2025.04.08 15:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document