- (1.) This revision petition is directed against the interim order of Rent Controller, Fazilka dated March 1, 1974, whereby application by the landlord to lead additional evidence was allowed.
(2.) Balwant Singh, landlord, respondent No. 1, filed an application for ejectment of the petitioner, respondent No. 2, from a shop on the ground of sub-letting. It was averred that the shop had been let out to Mukand Lal, respondent No. 2 who has sub-let the same to his son, the petitioner. After both the parties had closed their evidence, application was moved by the landlord for permission to lead additional evidence to prove two money order receipts showing that Subhash Chander and Kewal Krishan had paid rent separately for the two shops. The evidence was sought to be adduced to rebut the stand taken by the petitioner that both the shops had been let out directly to him and Kewal Krishan. After the hearing the parties the Rent Controller accepted the application and permitted the leading of additional evidence.
(3.) Mr. N. L. Dhingra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the burden of proof of the issue was on respondent No. 1 and he having closed his evidence, there was no right of rebuttal available to him. In support of his contention, the learned counsel has relied upon Guranditta Ram v. Murair Lal etc, 1974 CurLJ 222. I am, however, unable to agree with the learned counsel. The decision relied upon, if read closely, is of no help to the petitioner and rather goes against him. In that case, the landlord wanted to lead evidence to contradict the statement of the tenant in respect to the existence of the account books and it was observed that no evidence which was relevant only for the purpose of showing that the parties had told lies in the witness-box could be permitted in rebuttal. The question of the jurisdiction of the Rent Controller allowing the additional evidence in a matter which is relevant to the issue was not before the court. The power of the Rent Controller to permit additional evidence even after the arguments had been concluded was upheld in Krishan Kumar v. Baldev Singh etc., 1974 CurLJ 233 and I am in respectful agreement with the said decision.;