CR No.3373 of 2009 1 In the Punjab and Haryana High Court,at Chandigarh. Decided on 03.6.2009 Satpal Sandhu --- Petitioner vs Joginder Singh -- Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.I.D.Singla,Advocate, for the petitioner Rakesh Kumar, Jain, J: This revision is directed against the order passed by the Rent Controller, Chandigarh, dated 30.4.2009. The Rent Controller passed the following order on 06.3.2009:- “One DW is present and cross examined. Defendant suffered a separate statement that he closed his evidence. On request case is adjourned to 26.3. 2009 for rebuttal evidence if any and arguments”. The petitioner filed an application before the Rent Controller for recalling of the aforesaid order in order to examine two more witnesses alleging therein that on 6.3.2009, the case was fixed for cross examination of the defendant witness, but the learned counsel for the defendant was busy in the High Court and could not come present at the time of cross examination which was conducted in the absence and the evidence was CR No.3373 of 2009 2 closed. It is,however, alleged that two material witnesses had been left out to be examined as the petitioner himself had inadvertently closed the evidence. Learned Court below had dismissed the application on the ground that neither there was any list of witnesses nor application for summoning the same. Even in the application which has been filed, no witness is named. The petitioner has not mentioned any provision of law under which the application had been filed. Mr. I.D.Singla, learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for grant of one opportunity to lead the evidence. I am afraid that such a prayer of the petitioner cannot be allowed as the evidence was closed by the petitioner himself by suffering a statement in the Court. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the present petition and the same is hereby dismissed in limine. No costs. June 03 ,2009 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge Refer to Reporter-- Yes