CR No. 6919 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No. 6919 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11.11.2011 Dharam Pal ...Petitioner Vs. Managing Committee, Arya College, Panipat .....Respondent BEFORE: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Suryakant Gautam, Advocate, for the petitioner. --- A.N.Jindal, J. In an eviction petition filed on 6.10.2008, the respondent/tenant filed two applications – one for permission to lead secondary evidence for proving site plan to prove construction of hall by the respondent School (herein referred as the respondent) on the first floor of the building and second for appointment of local commissioner to visit the first floor portion of the premises adjoining to demised premises and to report as to whether any hall stands constructed and as to whether the hall is being put to any use or not. The petitioner/landlord has contested both the CR No. 6919 of 2011 2 applications. Trial court dismissed both the applications. Actually, the Arya College, Panipat (respondent) have claimed the ejectment of the petitioner from the shop on the ground, of arrears of rent and personal necessity and nuisance. Issues in the case were framed on 20.2.2009. Respondent concluded evidence on 7.10.2010 and the case was adjourned to 9.11.2010 for the evidence of the petitioner. On 9.11.2010, no evidence was available, therefore, the case was adjourned for 3.12.2010. On 3.12.2010, the petitioner moved an application for permitting to get the site plan prepared but the said application was dismissed on 27.5.2011 and the case was adjourned for 9.8.2011 for petitioner's evidence. On 9.8.2011 there was no evidence, therefore, the case was adjourned for his evidence for 3.09.2011 and then for 7.9.2011 on which date the petitioner examined himself as RW 1 and his evidence was concluded on 12.09.2011. Then case was adjourned on 15.9.2011. On that day the petitioner had tendered Jamabandi for the year 2003-04 Ex.D.1 and closed his evidence and the case was fixed for 20.9.2011for rebuttal evidence and arguments. On 20.9.2011 the case was adjourned to 27.9.2011, then for 3.10.2011 and 14.10.2011 for conclusion of rebuttal evidence and arguments. In the meanwhile on 13.10.2011, the petitioner had moved the present application. Ejectment application has been filed by the institution i.e. the College. The respondent/landlord has not denied the construction CR No. 6919 of 2011 3 but has stated that respondent/college has made the construction of the said hall on account of the shortage of accommodation and for using the same for installing the library. The trial court has also observed that the petitioner previously also moved an application for appointment of Local Commission which was dismissed and revision filed against the said order was also dismissed. Similarly, no sufficient grounds as recorded under section 65 of Evidence Act have been pleaded for leading secondary evidence. Both the applications appear to have been filed just to delay the proceedings. No grounds to interfere. Dismissed. (A.N.Jindal) 11.11.2011 Judge rp