Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VIKAS BAHL
Gulshan Kumar Verma – Appellant
Versus
Charanveer Singh Dandass – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. tenant seeks recall of witnesses after amendment. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. respondent argues delay tactics employed by tenant. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 3. court finds insufficient proof on ownership claims. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. recall of witnesses is at court's discretion, not party's. (Para 21 , 22) |
| 5. revision petition dismissed for lack of merit. (Para 27 , 28) |
JUDGMENT :
Vikas Bahl, J.
Present revision petition has been filed by the tenant under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 04.09.2023 (Annexure P-14) passed by the Rent Controller, Sangrur, vide which the application dated 10.05.2023 (Annexure P-12) filed by the petitioner for recalling the witnesses of the landlord/respondent for further cross-examination has been dismissed.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case, the respondent-landlord, in a petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter to be referred as '1949 Act'), has stated that he is not occupying any other building in the urban area of Sangrur except the shop in dispute. It is further submitted that it was a specifi
Court held that a request to recall witnesses is a discretion of the court and not a right of the parties, especially to avoid delays in proceedings.
The revisional court can correct trial court findings based on legal misinterpretation, especially when admissions negate the need for further proof.
Point of law: Interference would be justified only in the event the view taken by the Rent Controller and the Tribunal is entirely arbitrary and perverse or in excess of jurisdiction.
High Court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India cannot sit in appeal over the findings recorded by a lower court or tribunal.
Ownership issues cannot be adjudicated in eviction suits; certified copies of public documents are admissible as evidence.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
