IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CR NO.1817 OF 2006 DATE OF DECISION: 02.7.2007 Satya Devi widow of Labh Singh ...Petitioner VERSUS Mohinder Singh and other ...Respondent CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT:Mr.S.S.Rangi, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.O.P.Goel, Sr.Advocate with Mr.B.R.Khurana, Advocate for the respondents Permod Kohli (Oral) This Civil Revision is directed against the order dated 4.2.2006 passed by the Rent Controller, Khanna whereby application of the petitioner for leading additional evidence has been rejected. In eviction proceedings initiated by the petitioner against the respondents, the evidence of the petitioner was closed and thereafter the respondents have also completed their evidence. It is on completion of the evidence of both the parties that an application came to be made by the petitioner, seeking a direction :2: for leading additional evidence in the form of documents to be summoned from the State Bank of India and Tehsildar Election to establish that Sukhwinder Singh is residing with the petitioner for whose benefit the eviction of the shop is sought for. The election record allegedly establishes that the petitioner had one of the grandsons, namely, Sukhwinder Singh who is residing with the petitioner, whereas the account of State Bank of India is intended to show that the petitioner has a joint account with her grandson, namely, Sukhwinder Singh. The trial court has rejected the said application having been filed belatedly. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show as to how this evidence is relevant for the just and proper adjudication of the dispute. In this view of the matter, I do not find any valid ground to interfere with the impugned order. In view of the above, I find no merit in this Civil Revision which is accordingly dismissed. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 2.7.2007 MFK NOTE:Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not:YES/NO