IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2685 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:26.04.2011. Satnam Kaur and others ...Petitioners Versus Gurudwara Singh Sabha Mai Nand Kaur (Regd.) ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 14.03.2011 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Ludhiana by which the application filed by the petitioners for re-calling AW1 Davinder Singh Sandhu for further cross-examination has been declined. The learned Rent Controller while dismissing the application observed that perusal of the file shows that the present application has been filed when the case was fixed for evidence of the respondents and as the case is fixed for evidence of the respondents, so the respondents are at liberty to prove these subsequent facts by leading cogent and convincing evidence and there is no requirement to summon AW1 Davinder Singh Sandhu for further cross-examination with regard to these facts. Although learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that it would not cause any injustice to the other side if AW1 Davinder Singh Sandhu is re- called for further cross-examination to prove that the landlord is using one of the two rooms, which was near to hall room out of which one had been shown in plan as an office, as a Jora Ghar. However, I do not find his argument to be substantial enough to interfere with the impugned order because the petitioners are leading their own evidence in which they can prove this fact and for that purpose the re-calling of AW1 Davinder Singh Sandhu for further cross-examination is not required. Hence, the revision petition is found to be totally without any merit and the same is hereby dismissed. April 26, 2011 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) vinod* Judge