The court emphasized the importance of allowing additional evidence when it is crucial for determining the real controversy between the parties.

J.V.Gupta, J.

1. This is landlords petition whose application for additional evidence filed before the appellate authority has been dismissed.

2. The landlord sought the ejectment of his tenant inter alia on the ground that the tenant has ceased to occupy the shop in dispute for the continuous period of more than 6 years. However, the Rent Controller dismissed the ejectment application. In appeal filed by the landlord, an application was made to allow him to lead additional evidence, to prove that there was an electric connection in the shop but the meter was not giving any consumption since January, 1981 and since the premises were found locked, the connection was disconnected on 9.4.1981 and was not got restored, subsequently. The learned appellate authority dismissed the said application on the ground that the conditions of clauses (b) and (c) of Order 41 Rule 27, Civil Procedure Code, are not fulfilled.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties I am of the considered view that the application was not to be considered under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Section 15, sub-section (4) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 itself provides that the appellate authority shall decide the appeal after sending for the records of the case from the Collector and after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard and if necessary after making such further enquiry as it thinks fit either personally or through the Controller. That being so, the evidence sought to be produced on the petitioners evidence was of documentary nature and was most material for determining the real controversy between the parties.

4. In the circumstance, the petition succeeds, the impugned order is set aside and the application for the additional evidence is allowed on payment of Rs. 200/- as costs. The evidence may be recorded either by the appellate authority himself or he may get the same done through the Rent Controller as contemplated under sub-section (4) of Section 15 of the Act ibid. The parties have been directed to appear before the appellate authority on 24.9.1985. Petition allowed.