Varinder Singh vs Surekha Kumari
2023 Latest Caselaw 9213 P&H

                                                                                  2023:PHHC:083275
       CR-3580-2023                                                                           -1-

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                         CHANDIGARH
       114
                                                                  CR-3580-2023
                                                                  Date of decision : 03.07.2023

       Varinder Singh
                                                                                    ..... Petitioner
                                                Versus
       Surekha Kumari
                                                                                   ..... Respondent
       CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI

       Present:                Mr. Bhupinder Kumar Gupta, Advocate
                               for the petitioner.

                                    ****

AMARJOT BHATTI J. (ORAL)

Varinder Singh through GPA Holder Rupinder Kumar Grewal filed

revision against the impugned order dated 12.04.2022 passed by learned Rent

Controller, Jalandhar in a case titled 'Surekha Kumari Vs Varinder Singh', bearing

No. Rent/73/2017 (Annexure P-22), whereby the right of the petitioner to cross-

examine the plaintiff witness has been treated as nil by the learned Rent

Controller.

2. It is argued that the landlady has filed Rent Petition No. 73/2017

under Section 13 of East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, seeking eviction of

the present petitioner/tenant from shop bearing No. 108 situated at Defence

Colony market, Jalandhar. The copy of petition is Annexure P-1. The notice was

served upon the petitioner/tenant and the written statement filed by him is

Annexure P-2. The rejoinder was filed on 17.05.2018, Annexure P-3 and after

framing of issues, the case was fixed for petitioner's evidence. The statement of

Manohar Lal PW-1 was recorded in examination-in-chief on 18.02.2019. LALIT SHARMA 2023.07.04 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment 2023:PHHC:083275

Thereafter, the case was adjourned from time to time. The copies of interlocutory

orders passed in the rent petition are Annexures P4 to P-22. Ultimately, the cross-

examination of Manohar Lal was treated as nil. Infact, the present petitioner has

never misused the accommodation granted by the learned Court below. The

witness could not be cross-examined due to unavoidable circumstances. It is

argued that the petitioner will suffer great loss in case he is not granted

opportunity to cross-examine the witness Manohar Lal PW-1. It is prayed that in

the interest of justice, he may be granted one opportunity to cross-examine

Manohar Lal PW-1. Hence, the present revision.

3. I have considered the stand taken by the learned counsel for the

petitioner and have gone through the interlocutory orders passed by the learned

Rent Controller from time to time. The perusal of interlocutory order dated

18.02.2019, Annexure P-4 shows that Manohar Lal PW-1 was present in the Court

for cross-examination but he could not be cross-examined as learned counsel for

respondent was not available. The perusal of interlocutory orders shows that the

present petitioner was given as many as nine opportunities to cross-examine the

witness but the counsel failed. Even the cost imposed by the Court concerned was

not paid. Ultimately, by passing the impugned order dated 12.04.2022, the cross-

examination of Manohar Lal PW-1 was treated as nil.

In the present rent petition, Manohar Lal PW-1 is a material witness

being husband of petitioner Surekha Kumari. The case is still pending before the

learned Rent Controller for adjudication. In case the present petitioner is not

granted opportunity to cross-examine Manohar Lal PW-1, the case of present

petitioner will be adversely effected. Even otherwise, it is in the interest of justice

that both the parties are given opportunity to lead their evidence completely and LALIT SHARMA 2023.07.04 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment 2023:PHHC:083275

then it should be decided on merits. No doubt, there is a delay on the part of

counsel for the present petitioner in cross-examination of Manohar Lal PW-1. The

record shows that the counsel for the present petitioner was given number of

opportunities to cross-examine the witness but he failed. The delay on the part of

present petitioner can be compensated by imposing cost on the present petitioner.

Even otherwise, no purpose would be served by serving notice to the respondent

as it will result into unnecessary delay and it will further increase the burden of

litigation expenditure on the landlady. Considering all the aspects of the present

case, the present revision is accepted. The impugned order dated 12.04.2022

passed by learned Rent Controller, Jalandhar, Annexure P-22 is set aside, subject

to payment of cost of Rs. 15,000/- to the landlady. The present petitioner Varinder

Singh would be granted only one effective opportunity to cross-examine Manohar

Lal PW-1.

The revision is accordingly, disposed of.

(AMARJOT BHATTI) JUDGE 03.07.2023 lalit

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No

LALIT SHARMA 2023.07.04 15:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment