Prem Chand Jain, J. - (1.) RAM Kishan Das has filed this revision petit on against the order of the learned Rent Controller Sirsa, dated September 27, 1976, which reads at under: At this stage an objection has been raised by the learned Counsel for the Respondent that as he cannot make out anything from the statement of the Mukhtar, therefore, it is necessary to bring the landlord in the witness box Therefore, the landlord be produced for making the statement and if the counsel for the Respondent desires the accounts books to be produced he should apply accordingly. To come up on 24th October 196(sic) for the evidence of the Petitioner.
(2.) AFTER hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, I am of the view that this revision petition deserves to be allowed. Merely on this ground that the learned Counsel for the Respondent could not make out anything from the statement of the Mukhtar, there was no jurisdiction in the Rent Controller to order the landlord to appear in the witness -box. The impugned order is wholly without jurisdiction. In this view of the matter, I allow the revision petition and set aside the impugned order. The parties through their learned Counsel have been directed to appear before the Rent Controller, who is now seized of the matter, on October 29, 1979
(3.) BEFORE parting with the judgment, it may be observed that the Rent Controller would complete the statement of the Mukhtar, who was appearing for the landlord.;