IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR NO.436 of 2007 DATE OF DECISION: January 25, 2007 Karam Chand ….Petitioner VERSUS Naresh Kumar and another ….Respondents CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL PRESENT: Ms.Upinder Kaur Bedi, Advocate for the petitioner. Viney Mittal,J.(Oral). The tenant is petitioner before this Court. He is aggrieved against an order dated January 12, 2007 passed by the Rent Controller, whereby the application filed by the tenant petitioner for framing of additional issues has been rejected. The learned Rent Controller has rightly observed that there is no need to frame additional issues claimed by the petitioner, inasmuch as, the aforesaid issues are also covered under the issue with regard to personal necessity i.e. issue No.2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find that the observations made by the Rent Controller is erroneous in any manner. Dismissed. January 25, 2007 (Viney Mittal) KD Judge