CR No.6400 of 2009 - 1 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CR No.6400 of 2009 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 09.11.2009 **** Arjan Singh . . . . Petitioner (through Special Power of Attorney) VS. Sham Sunder Mehta . . . . Respondent **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. S.S. Grewal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Sham Sunder, respondent in person **** SURYA KANT J.(ORAL) (1). This revision petition is directed by the petitioner- tenant against the order dated 16.10.2009 passed by the Rent Controller, Rajpura, whereby, his evidence has been closed due to non-production thereof, despite repeated opportunities. (2). Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, the respondent-landlord is present in person. CR No.6400 of 2009 - 2 - (3). Mr. Sham Sunder (respondent-landlord) explains that the petitioner-tenant has gone abroad (Canada) and the shop in question is lying closed for the last 2 years. He, however, has no serious objection if one last opportunity is granted to the petitioner to produce his evidence at his own responsibility on reasonable costs. (4). In view of the fair stand taken by the respondent, the revision petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 16.10.2009 passed by the Rent Controller, Rajpura is set aside with a direction to the Rent Controller, Rajpura to grant only one opportunity to the petitioner-tenant to lead his entire evidence at his own responsibility and subject to payment of cost of Rs.5000/- to the respondent-landlord. The petitioner is directed to produce his entire evidence on the date fixed i.e. 12.11.2009. (5). Dasti. (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 09.11.2009 vishal shonkar