CR No.6736 of 2009 - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CR No.6736 of 2009 Date of Decision: 19.11.2009 **** Smt. Neelam Arora . . . . Petitioner VS. Deepak Mahal & others . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Harmanjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. S.M. Wadhera, Advocate for the respondents ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) 1) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 24.10.2009 passed by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh, whereby, further opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine the respondent no.1/landlord, has been declined. 2) The impugned order dated 24.10.2009 indeed, is based upon correct appreciation of facts and law and, ordinarily, would have warrant no interference by this Court. However, counsel for the petitioner submits that in the interest of justice only one opportunity may be granted as the CR No.6736 of 2009 - 2 – petitioner has already changed her counsel and is willing to give an undertaking that as and when respondent No.1 would appear, her counsel would cross-examine him. 3) In view of the above-stated undertaking, the impugned order passed by the learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh is, hereby, set aside and it is directed that respondent No.1, may appear for his cross-examination by the counsel for the petitioner on the date already fixed or on any other date that may be fixed by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh. Only one opportunity shall be granted to the counsel for the petitioner to cross- examine the said witness and in the event of non-availability of her counsel, the opportunity shall be deemed to have not been availed. The said opportunity shall be granted subject to payment of cost of Rs.20,000/- payable to the respondent-landlord. The payment, whereof, shall be made before the Rent Controller, Chandigarh. 4) Counsel for the respondent-landlord further alleges that the petitioner has not paid the rent and is in arrears to the tune of over Rs.6 lacs. Counsel for the petitioner, however, seriously disputes the said contention. 5) Since the above-stated controversy is beyond the scope of this revision petition, the Rent Controller, Chandigarh is directed to pass appropriate orders after considering the rival contentions of the parties. As the petitioner is being permitted to cross-examine the respondent CR No.6736 of 2009 - 3 – No.1/landlord, it will be open for the respondent-landlords to lead further evidence, if so required. 6) Disposed of. 7) Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 19.11.2009 shonkar