IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.2111 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:01.09.2011 Bishan Dass ...Petitioner Versus Shri Jainendra Gurukul ....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG 1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? *** Present: Mr. Sushil Gautam, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vivek Suri, Advocate for the respondent. * * * RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J (ORAL) This is tenant's revision petition challenging the impugned order dated 14.02.2011 whereby his prayer to recall and cross-examination of the respondent-landlord's witness on the ground of changed personal necessity was declined. The landlord had averred in his original petition that demised property was required for construction of hostel for the children. However, amendment was sought as under:- “In the ground of personal necessity, as now instead of raising construction of hostel for children, the petitioner society wants to raise construction of Bhagwan Mandir Jain University for providing more education to the students.” Civil Revision No.2111 of 2011 (O&M) -2- Vide order dated 25.01.2011 of the Rent Controller, respondent-landlord was allowed to amend the ground of personal necessity as aforesaid. The petitioner moved an application to recall the witness of respondent-landlord for further cross-examination regarding the changed ground of personal necessity. Vide impugned order the said prayer was declined. During the course of hearing, Shri Vivek Suri, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-landlord has stated that he has instructions from his client to state that the impugned order be set-aside and petitioner be given liberty to cross-examine the witness of respondent- landlord regarding the personal necessity by recalling the witness. In view of the stand taken by the counsel for the respondent- landlord, this petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. Parties through their counsels are directed to be present before the Rent Controller on 16.09.2011 and on that date the Rent Controller shall fix the date to allow the cross-examination of the landlord's witness and on the date fixed the petitioner's counsel shall be allowed to cross- examine the said witness regarding the personal necessity of the respondent. The petitioner shall not ask for further adjournment and no further adjournment shall be granted for this purpose. This petition is disposed of accordingly. September 1, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) savita JUDGE