HARI RAM Vs. CHANDAN MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the tenant against the order of learned Rent Controller closing his right to cross-examine the witnesses of the landlord-respondent.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the learned Court below was not correct in closing the respondent's right to lead further evidence. He submits that if the order sheets which have been appended with this petition are considered in their entirety it would evident that the petitioner has not been responsible for causing any delay. The case has remained pending because on a number of occasions the Presiding Officer was absent being on leave and no proceedings could take place. It has been observed on more than 1. Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment, Yes.

(2.) one occasions that petitioner could not cross-examine the respondent's witnesses whose evidence had been tendered by way of affidavit. I have considered the rival contentions of parties and gone through the record. I do find that the case has a chequered history and that on more than one occasion, the Presiding Officer was on leave which had necessitated the adjournments. I do not find that the conduct of the petitioner is such which can be classed as malafide which invited action for closing the right of petitioner to cross examine the witnesses. This petition is therefore allowed subject to the condition that learned trial Court shall give one more opportunity to the petitioner herein to cross examine the witnesses of the landlord who have tendered their evidence by way of affidavits. This will be subject to the petitioner paying Rs. 500/- as costs to the respondent. Parties to appear before the learned trial Court i.e. Rent Controller, Solan on 18th December, 2009.