Civil Revision No. 356 of 2009 (O & M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 356 of 2009 (O & M) Date of decision 29.1.2009 Janinder Kumar Jain .....Petitioner versus Arun Kumar Mandal .....Respondents Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. Kannan. Present: Mr. K. S. Boparia, Advocate for the petitioner. K. Kannan, J (Oral) 1. Having regard to the nature of order that is proposed to be passed I dispense with notice to the respondents. The trial Court directed the closure of evidence on the side of the respondents on the ground that RW-2 who was the party-defendant did not produce himself on the date of hearing and observed that the respondents had taken at least six months for producing the evidence, and directed arguments to be made on 15.1.2009. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner argues with reference to the zimni orders that the case had been posted for examination-in-chief by affidavits on 7.11.2008 but their cross-examination was deferred at the request of the counsel for the claimant and the case was set down for cross-examination on 3.12.2008. On 3.12.2008 the lawyers were abstaining from work and hence, the case were adjourned to 6.1.2009, on that adjourned date RW-1 had been cross-examined and on the non- availability of RW-2, the case had been directed to be closed. In an ejectment petition under the Rent Control Act where RW-2 was the principal contesting party and his evidence was most crucial, the conclusion Civil Revision No. 356 of 2009 (O & M) -2- of evidence even without the cross-examination would cause immense hardship. While no serious exception could be taken to the nature of order passed by the Rent Controller, I feel that interest of justice would be best served if the respondent in the rent control petition is given an opportunity to tender his evidence and subject himself to cross-examination. 3. The revision petition will be allowed on condition that the respondent pays Rs.2000/- to the petitioner before the Rent Controller or his counsel on or before 10.2.2009 and he shall appear in Court on 16.2.2009. If the directions of the payment of cost is not complied with, the order of the Court below will stand confirmed and the revision petition will be treated as dismissed. 4. The civil revision petition is disposed of on the above terms. ( K. KANNAN ) JUDGE 29.01.2009 A. KAUNDAL