Civil Revision No. 6314 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 6314 of 2011 Date of Decision: 17.10.2011 *** Santosh Mittal .. Petitioner VS. Gurjesh Inder Singh & Ors. .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The petitioner-tenant is aggrieved with order dated 28.7.2011 by virtue of which his application for recalling PW1 Girish Inder Singh Virk, one of the landlords, for further cross-examination, has been dismissed. Heard. The ejectment of the petitioner has been sought on the ground of change of user. By filing the impugned application he wants to put certain documents to the witness, in his further cross-examination, to show that earlier restaurant was being run in the property in dispute, which business was continued by the petitioner-tenant and as such there was no change of user. The perusal of the impugned order reveals that the documents sought to be put to the landlord by way of cross examination came into the knowledge of the petitioner-tenant after filing of written statement, but despite that he did not bother to get his written statement amended by incorporating the said fact therein. That apart, the said documents were never put to the witness-landlord at the time of his cross- examination. Not only this, the application in hand was found to have been filed just to fill up the lacuna, which is not permissible as per law. Civil Revision No. 6314 of 2011 2 Therefore, considering these aspects of the matter, the learned trial Court rightly rejected the prayer of the petitioner. The impugned order is neither illegal nor perverse. The instant petition, being without any merit, is accordingly dismissed in limine. (ARVIND KUMAR) October 17,2011 JUDGE Jiten