IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision No.7924 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 21.12.2011 Parminder Singh -----Petitioner Vs. Jatinder Singh Grewal & others -----Respondents 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. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. --- RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J. 1. This is tenant’s revision petition challenging the impugned order dated 5.12.2011 of the Rent Controller, Ludhiana, whereby his evidence has been closed by order of the Court. 2. While passing the impugned order, the Rent Controller, Ludhiana has noticed that despite giving a pass over on first call, learned counsel representing the petitioner had not turned up for the whole day to attend the case and the petitioner insisted for his cross-examination only in the presence of his C.R. No.7924 of 2011 counsel. It has also been noticed by the Rent Controller that there was no justification for further adjournment as the petitioner had availed sufficient opportunities and it was a time bound case. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner without going into the merits of the case has only submitted that the case is fixed for 24.12.2011 for rebuttal evidence and no prejudice is going to be caused to the respondent-landlord if the petitioner is allowed to lead his evidence on that day subject to payment of costs. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner should not be made to suffer for the fault of his counsel. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order is modified to the extent that the petitioner is allowed one more opportunity to lead his evidence on the date fixed i.e. 24.12.2011, subject to payment of costs quantified at `10,000/-. It is made clear that payment of costs shall be a condition precedent for allowing the petitioner to lead his evidence. The petitioner shall lead the entire evidence at his own risk and responsibility. No further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner. 5. The petition is disposed of. 6. Order be given dasti on usual charges. December 21, 2011 ( RAKESH KUMAR GARG ) ak JUDGE 2