CR No. 5603 of 2011 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR No. 5603 of 2011 (O&M)
Date of decision : 14.9.2011
...
Ganesh Dass and sons
................Petitioner
vs.
Rajinder Kumar and others
.................Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri
Present: Sh. Vikas Mohan Gupta, Advocate
for the petitioner
...
K.C. Puri, J.
Challenge in this case is to the order dated 30.8.2011 passed
by the Rent Controller, vide which the cross examination of AW-15
Daljit Singh was treated as nil, as counsel for the tenant has failed to
cross examine the witness.
Briefly stated, the landlord filed eviction petition in the year
1989 on various grounds and the same is pending for adjudication.
The landlord examined AW-15 Daljit Singh and the tenant filed
revision petition before this Court that said witness cannot be
examined in rebuttal. However, that revision petition was ultimately
dismissed by this Court on 5.9.2011. However, at the time of issuance
of notice of motion, on 16.5.2011 it was ordered that the Rent
CR No. 5603 of 2011 -2-
Controller will adjourn the case beyond the date fixed in the revision
petition. Notice of motion was issued for 11.7.2011. However, on
17.8.2011, the Rent Controller directed the tenant to produce the stay
order passed by this Court, failing which the cross examination of
AW-15 Daljit Singh would be deemed to be nil and the case was
adjourned to 30.8.2011. On the said date, counsel for the tenant
requested for adjournment for cross examination. However, the Rent
Controller ordered the case to be taken up after lunch. After lunch no
body appeared and the Rent Controller treated the cross examination
of AW-15 Daljit Singh as nil. The said order has been challenged in
the present revision petition.
Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that vide
order dated 16.5.2011 this Court directed the Rent Controller to
adjourn the case beyond the date fixed. The said revision petition was
ultimately dismissed only on 5.9.2011. So, in view of the authority
reported as Gram Panchayat, Majri vs. Joint Director Panchayats,
Punjab and others 1989 PLJ 604, the order of adjournment shall
remain operative till 5.9.2011.
I have carefully considered the said submission and have
also gone through the above said authority.
In the said authority the operation of the order was stayed
subject to furnishing of surety but the surety was tendered before the
wrong officer. There is no stay order in the present case. The case was
simply adjourned on 16.5.2011for 11.7.2011 with the observation that
Rent Controller shall adjourn the case beyond that date. There is no
order for adjournment of the case by the Rent Controller after
CR No. 5603 of 2011 -3-
11.7.2011, in the above said revision.
However, keeping in view that rights of the parties are
involved and tenant should not suffer on account of advice given by
the counsel and there may be serious prejudice to the case of the
respondent, so the impugned order dated 30.8.2011 stands set aside
without issuing any notice to the respondent as serving of notice
would further delay the proceedings of the case which are pending
since 1989. The petitioner shall be entitle to cross examine AW-15 on
payment of costs of ` 5,000/- to the landlord. The petitioner-tenant
shall get the service of AW-15 Daljit Singh effected, with the
assistance of the Court and shall be given only one opportunity to
examine that witness.
The revision petition stands disposed of, with above said
observations.
( K.C. Puri )
14.9.2011 Judge
chugh