Civil Revision No. 2024 of 2010 -1- ***** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 2024of 2010 Date of decision : 18.5.2010 Goni Bedi ....Petitioners Versus Akhlesh Kumar ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. Prashant Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Avinash Mittal, Advocate for the respondent. S. D. ANAND, J. It is apparent from the impugned order itself that no opportunity to file pleadings had been afforded to the petitioner- tenant to have his say in the matter of fixture of the provisional rent. This was the precise grievance which, infact, was indicated at the time of hearing. Even the learned counsel for the respondent is not in a position to argue in favour of the validity of the impugned order. Needless to reiterate that judicial adjudications have necessarily to be preceded by a hearing to the parties. In this case, all that was available before the learned Rent Controller in the matter was plea of the respondent-landlord in the matter of rate of rent etc. It was required of the learned Rent Controller to have the pleadings of the petitioner-tenant as well in the context and, then, to proceed to pass whatever order was deemed appropriate in the matter of fixture of provisional rent. Civil Revision No. 2024 of 2010 -2- ***** The petition shall stand allowed. The impugned order shall stand set aside. The parties, through their learned counsel, are directed to appear before the learned Rent Controller on 3.6.2010. The petitioner-tenant shall file the pleadings on 3.6.2010. The learned Rent Controller shall dispose of the matter regarding fixture of provisional rent on 3.6.2010 itself. May 18, 2010 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE