Sanjay Karol, J.

In this petition filed under Section 24(5) of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), following questions arise for consideration: (i) As to whether application filed before this Court (under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC), seeking permission to lead additional evidence is bonafide and is necessarily to be allowed for determining the controversy in issue? (ii) Whether Cross Objections filed by the respondent-tenant under Order 41 Rule 22 CPC are maintainable or not? (iii) What is the scope of interference by this Court in a revision petition filed under Section 24(5) of the Act? (iv) Whether, while examining the correctness, legality or propriety of the orders passed by the Authorities below, this Court can grant relief to the respondent-tenant? (v) Whether the findings, concurrent in nature, so returned by the Authorities below are perverse or illegal, warranting interference by this Court? and (vi) Whether in the absence of any interim order, staying the operation of the order sought to be executed, it was open for the Rent Controller to have dismissed the execution petition only on account of pendency of the peti