IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2028 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision:23.3.2011 Dhian Chand . . .Petitioner Versus Ritesh Malhotra . . . Respondent ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.Shiv Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J (ORAL) CM No.7883-CII-2011 Application is allowed as prayed for. CR No.2028 of 2011 This revision petition is directed against order dated 14.3.2011 passed by the Rent Controller, Jalandhar by which evidence of the petitioner has been ordered to be closed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that his evidence was started on 16.11.2010. On 3.12.2010 he could not produce any witness. Thereafter, he filed an application for recalling the witnesses which was contested by the respondent and ultimately decided on 31.1.2011. Thereafter on 17.2.2011, he examined two witnesses and on the adjourned dates also examined the witnesses. However, by the impugned order, his evidence has been closed on the ground that the case pertains to the year 2003 and falls under the Samadhan cases. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into consideration the zimini orders produced by him on record, I am of the view that the impugned order is patently illegal and deserves to be set aside. The petitioner has been pursuing his case diligently and has examined the witnesses. The delay that has been caused is attributable to the landlord if he has closed the evidence in 2010. The petitioner has been granted only three effective opportunities on which he has led his evidence. In view thereof, the present revision petition is allowed and impugned order passed by the Rent Controller, Jalandhar is hereby set aside. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) MARCH 23, 2011 JUDGE Vivek