CR No. 5603 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No. 5603 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 14.9.2011 ... Ganesh Dass and sons ................Petitioner vs. Rajinder Kumar and others .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri Present: Sh. Vikas Mohan Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner ... K.C. Puri, J. Challenge in this case is to the order dated 30.8.2011 passed by the Rent Controller, vide which the cross examination of AW-15 Daljit Singh was treated as nil, as counsel for the tenant has failed to cross examine the witness. Briefly stated, the landlord filed eviction petition in the year 1989 on various grounds and the same is pending for adjudication. The landlord examined AW-15 Daljit Singh and the tenant filed revision petition before this Court that said witness cannot be examined in rebuttal. However, that revision petition was ultimately dismissed by this Court on 5.9.2011. However, at the time of issuance of notice of motion, on 16.5.2011 it was ordered that the Rent CR No. 5603 of 2011 -2- Controller will adjourn the case beyond the date fixed in the revision petition. Notice of motion was issued for 11.7.2011. However, on 17.8.2011, the Rent Controller directed the tenant to produce the stay order passed by this Court, failing which the cross examination of AW-15 Daljit Singh would be deemed to be nil and the case was adjourned to 30.8.2011. On the said date, counsel for the tenant requested for adjournment for cross examination. However, the Rent Controller ordered the case to be taken up after lunch. After lunch no body appeared and the Rent Controller treated the cross examination of AW-15 Daljit Singh as nil. The said order has been challenged in the present revision petition. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that vide order dated 16.5.2011 this Court directed the Rent Controller to adjourn the case beyond the date fixed. The said revision petition was ultimately dismissed only on 5.9.2011. So, in view of the authority reported as Gram Panchayat, Majri vs. Joint Director Panchayats, Punjab and others 1989 PLJ 604, the order of adjournment shall remain operative till 5.9.2011. I have carefully considered the said submission and have also gone through the above said authority. In the said authority the operation of the order was stayed subject to furnishing of surety but the surety was tendered before the wrong officer. There is no stay order in the present case. The case was simply adjourned on 16.5.2011for 11.7.2011 with the observation that Rent Controller shall adjourn the case beyond that date. There is no order for adjournment of the case by the Rent Controller after CR No. 5603 of 2011 -3- 11.7.2011, in the above said revision. However, keeping in view that rights of the parties are involved and tenant should not suffer on account of advice given by the counsel and there may be serious prejudice to the case of the respondent, so the impugned order dated 30.8.2011 stands set aside without issuing any notice to the respondent as serving of notice would further delay the proceedings of the case which are pending since 1989. The petitioner shall be entitle to cross examine AW-15 on payment of costs of ` 5,000/- to the landlord. The petitioner-tenant shall get the service of AW-15 Daljit Singh effected, with the assistance of the Court and shall be given only one opportunity to examine that witness. The revision petition stands disposed of, with above said observations. ( K.C. Puri ) 14.9.2011 Judge chugh