CR-5022-2025(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-5022-2025(O&M) Date of decision: 19.08.2025 Baldev Krishan … Petitioner Versus Satish Chawla … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL Present: Mr. Aayush Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Lakshay Bector, Advocate, for the respondent. *** VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL) By way of the instant revision petition, preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-tenant assails the order dated 21.07.2025, passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Ludhiana, vide which warrants of attachment were issued. 2. On 31.07.2025, this Court had passed the following order: “Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that vide order dated 02.04.2024 (Annexure P-4), leave to contest was declined to the present petitioner. However, in terms of the provisions of Section 38(7)(e) of the Punjab Rent Act, 1995, a period of 10 days was granted to the petitioner to institute a review petition, failing which, the landlord would have a right to get the demised premises vacated by adopting the due course of law. Learned counsel submits that the review application was duly filed on 10.04.2024 and was taken up on 12.04.2024 (Annexure P-14). He submits that despite the RAJAN KUMAR 2025.08.21 10:01 I am approving this document CR-5022-2025(O&M) 2 same, the executing Court is proceeding in the matter and has issued warrants of attachment. Learned counsel further submits that the review application is now fixed for hearing on 29.08.2025. Notice of motion for 19.08.2025. Process dasti as well. Liberty is granted to serve the said respondent through counsel representing him before the Rent Controller/Executing Court, as the case may be. Till then possession of the petitioner shall not be disturbed. To be shown in the urgent list.” 3. Today, during the course of arguments, learned counsel representing the parties have reached a consensus. It has been agreed that appropriate directions be issued to the Court concerned to decide the review application within a time-bound period. 4. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 5. Section 38(7)(e) of the Punjab Rent Act, 1995 provides as under: “Where the leave to contest under clause (c) is denied to the tenant he may file an application for review before the Rent Authority within ten days of such denial and the Rent Authority shall endeavour to dispose of such application within seven days of its filing.” 6. A perusal of the aforesaid clause reveals that the review application was to be decided within a period of seven days. However, no RAJAN KUMAR 2025.08.21 10:01 I am approving this document CR-5022-2025(O&M) 3 such decision was rendered within the stipulated time. It is the case of the respondent-landlord that the delay in deciding the review application is being caused by the petitioner-tenant, whereas learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant refutes the said assertion. 7. Be that as it may, none of the parties can be permitted to take undue advantage of any provision. That being so, a direction is issued to the Court concerned to hear arguments in the review application on the date fixed, i.e. 29.08.2025, and decide the same within one week thereafter. 8. Accordingly, the revision petition is disposed of in terms of the statements made by learned counsel for the parties, with the impugned order being modified to the extent that till the review application is decided, the warrants of attachment shall not be given effect to. 9. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. ( Vikram Aggarwal ) Judge August 19, 2025 Rajan Whether speaking / reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No RAJAN KUMAR 2025.08.21 10:01 I am approving this document