Allowed

Vikas Chawla v. Banarsi Dass

Punjab & Haryana HC14 Oct 2009CR/2771/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision petition challenged the Rent Controller's order declining a call for the Local Commissioner for cross-examination. The High Court allowed the petition, setting aside the impugned order, granting one opportunity to examine the Commissioner, and awarded costs to the respondent.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; petitioner granted liberty to produce Local Commissioner for cross-examination and directed to pay Rs.4000/- costs to respondent.

Vikas Chawla Vs Banarsi Dass — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Revision No.2771 of 2009 (O&M)

¶3

Date of Decision : 14.10.2009

Vikas Chawla

.....Petitioner

versus

Banarsi Dass

.....Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

¶10

Present : Mr.G.C.Shahpuri, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Rahul Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent.

¶11

-.-

¶12

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶13

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶14

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶17

This revision petition is directed against the order dated 18.4.2009 passed by the Rent Controller, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, whereby the application moved by the petitioner-tenant, to recall the Local Commissioner for his further cross-examination has been declined.

¶18

It appears that the Local Commissioner was appointed by the Court at its own vide order dated 13.5.2004 and the report of the Local Commissioner dated 5.6.2004 was taken on record. The parties have concluded their evidence. The petitioner-tenant thereafter, moved the present application to re-summon the Local Commissioner for his further

¶19

C.R. No.2771 of 2009 (O&M) 2

¶20

cross-examination. It may be true that on a liberal interpretation of Order 26 Rule 9 & 10 CPC, the Court can always permit the parties to examine/cross-examine a Local Commissioner as it would strengthen the credibility of the report submitted by him but subject to the safe guard against mis-use of such a wider approach.

¶21

Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, it appears in the interest of justice to grant one opportunity to the petitionertenant to produce the Local Commissioner at his own responsibility and examine/cross-examine him after compensating the respondent-landlord with costs.

¶22

The revision petition is accordingly allowed to the extent above; the impugned order dated 18.4.2009 is set-aside and it is directed that the petitioner shall be at liberty to produce the Local Commissioner on the next date of hearing fixed before the Rent Controller at his own responsibility and subject him to examination/cross-examination with equal right to the opposite party. The petitioner shall also pay Rs.4000/- as costs to the respondent-landlord.

¶23

It is made clear that only one opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner, preferably before 30.11.2009.

Dasti.

(SURYA KANT) JUDGE

14-10-2009

Mohinder

Vikas Chawla v. Banarsi Dass

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Chawla v. Banarsi Dass

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saroj Rani and Ors. Vs Anil Kumar Sareen and Ors.

M/S Satpal Pawan Kumar Commission Agent &Ors. Vs Vijay Kumar

Pyari Devi Vs Singh Ram and Ors.

Ravinder Kumar Vs Banarsi Dass

Sarabjit Kaur Vs Amarjit Singh

(O&M)Chaman Lal and Another Vs Ram Saran Dass and Ors.