IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Civil Revision No.201 of 2008. Date of decision: 06.03.2009. Karan Kumar Dhawan …Petitioner Versus Mahesh Gupta & Others …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Dev Darshan Sud,J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No. For the Petitioner: Mr.M.S. Thakur, Advocate. For Respondent No.1: Mr.Y.P.Sood, Advocate. Dev Darshan Sud,J. The petitioner has approached this Court against the order passed by the learned Rent Controller, Shimla, declining permission to the petitioner herein to cross-examine the landlord on the aspect as to whether one of the sets in the building owned by the respondent- landlord was vacated by one Shri Mast Ram which was further rented out by him to one Rajinder Kumar. The learned trial Court while disposing of the application under Order 18 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, noticed that amendment in the pleadings of the petitioner-tenant was allowed to the extent that one of the sets in the building was vacated by one Shri Mast Ram 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement? Yes. 2 (Shalig Ram) which was further rented out by the landlord to Shri Rajinder Kumar. The Court noticed that the petitioner-landlord did not dispute the factum of vacation and further renting out the premises. The stand adopted by him was that this set was not fit for his personal occupation. Accepting these pleadings, the learned Court rejected the application. This was not the proper course for the learned Court to have followed. Obviously, the admission in the pleadings or otherwise made by the landlord would be binding on him as permissible under law. But the aspect as to whether the set was fit or unfit for the occupation of the landlord, was a matter on which cross-examination of the landlord was to be allowed in order to test the veracity of the bonafides urged by him. In these circumstances, this petition is allowed. A direction is issued that the learned Rent Controller shall permit cross-examination of the landlord to the extent as to whether one of the sets owned by the landlord was vacated by one Mast Ram and rented out to Rajinder Kumar was suitable for the occupation of the landlord. There shall be no order as to costs. Records of the Courts below if received be sent back immediately. CMP No.980 of 2008. Infructuous. March 6, 2009. (Dev Darshan Sud) (aks) Judge.