IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 126 CR-3266-2025 Date of Decision: 27.05.2025 BABY DEVI AND ANOTHER …..PETITIONERS Vs. SATYA DEVI …..RESPONDENT CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present: Ms. Monika Thakur, Advocate for the peoners. ******* DEEPAK GUPTA, J. Peoners are aggrieved by the order dated 04.04.2025 (Annexure P-5) passed by learned Appellate Authority, Ludhiana, whereby the dispossession of the tenants/appellants (peoners herein) has been stayed, but subject to payment of arrears of rent as assessed by the Rent Controller. 2. Peon under Secon 20 of the Punjab Rent Act, 1995 was filed by the landlord-Satya Devi (respondent herein) seeking evicon of tenants Baby Devi and Jander Shah (peoners herein) from the demised premises on the ground of non-payment of arrears of rent and bona fide need of the landlord. Tenants i.e. peoners herein denied the relaonship of landlord and tenant between the pares and claimed that they in fact were inducted by one Lachhman Singh in the premises as tenants. 3. Necessary issues were framed. Evidence produced by the pares was taken on record. 4. Learned Rent Controller came to the conclusion that there was relaonship of landlord and tenant between the pares. Since, the relaonship of landlord and tenant between the pares was established and the rent had not been paid, so the tenants were held liable to be vacated in view of the legal posion explained in ‘Rakesh Wadhawan and Others Vs. PRIYANKA 2025.05.29 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-3266-2025 M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corporaon & Others’, 2002(1) RCR (Rent) 514. Landlord was also held entled for evicon of the tenants on the ground of bona fide need. The Rent Controller specifically found that total amount of ₹8,47,125/- were due towards the tenants, which had not been paid. 5. The tenants-peoners filed appeal against the aforesaid order along with an applicaon to stay the operaon of the order of the Rent Controller. 6. The Appellate Authority by way of the impugned order dated 04.04.2025 (Annexure P-5), stayed the dispossession of the appellants/tenants i.e. peoners herein, but subject to payment of arrears of rent as assessed by the Rent Controller. 7. Assailing the aforesaid order, it is contended by learned counsel that appeal is sll pending; that peoners being poor person are not in posion to make payment and, therefore, the dispossession should have been stayed without pu<ng any condion of making payment of the arrears. 8. This Court does not find any merit in the contenon. Once the relaonship of landlord and tenant between the pares was established, the peoners-tenants rendered themselves liable for evicon, due to non- payment of arrears. The Appellate Authority has stayed the dispossession of the tenants/appellants and can not be stated to have commi>ed any error in making this order subject to deposing the arrears of rent. Peoners cannot be allowed to enjoy the possession over the demised premises without making payment of arrears, simply on the ground that the appeal is pending. No merit. Dismissed. 27.05.2025 Pry (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes Whether reportable? No PRIYANKA 2025.05.29 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document