IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.1492 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision :30.3.2010 Parmod Goyal @ Goel ....Petitioner Versus Inder Mohan and another ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr. Namit Gautam, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. C.M.No.5599-CII of 2010 Allowed as prayed for. C.R.No.1492 of 2010 This petition is directed against the order dated 19.11.2009 by which the prayer of the petitioner for examining a building expert has been declined. The petitioner had moved the application for examining a building expert at the appellate stage. The sole question which was there before the learned Rent Controller, before whom the proceedings were initiated at the first instance was regarding the condition of the shop. The petitioner ought to have adduced such evidence in support of his case at the first available opportunity to him but he chose to sleep over his rights and invoked the jurisdiction of the appellate authority after inviting an adverse order from the Rent C.R.No.1492 of 2010 (O&M) -2- Controller who was the authority of the first instance. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment of the Supreme Court reported as Radhey Shyam Rastogi v. Ashish Kumar and Anr., 2008(2) RLR 561 in support of his plea. I have perused the material on record and have also gone through the cited judgment. There can be no quarrel with the observations made by the Supreme Court but it has to be seen that whether the petitioner, who had the opportunity to make such prayer, did so in the first instance so as to lead evidence in the affirmative before the Rent Controller or not. Having not availed of such opportunity, the same cannot be granted to him at the appellate stage especially when the only plea raised for not doing so is inadvertence. No ground to interfere. Dismissed. 30.3.2010 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss