In summary rent control proceedings, a request for cross-examination to determine locus standi may be denied where the matter can be adequately resolved through existing pleadings and evidence, and where allowing such a course would defeat the objective of expeditious adjudication.

Order

The revision petitioner, a tenant, challenges the order dated 02.04.2026 passed by the Rent Controller in MP.No.1 of 2026, refusing permission to cross-examine PW1.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent is in no way connected with the petition premises and has been falsely implicated, and therefore seeks to test the claim through cross-examination. However, it is not in dispute that the rental agreement exists between the landlord/petitioner and the 1st respondent, and the alleged relationship between them stands admitted.

3. The burden to establish locus standi and the existence of any independent right lies upon the 2nd respondent. On a perusal of the records, no prima facie material has been produced to substantiate such claim. Mere assertions, in the absence of supporting evidence, are insufficient. In such circumstances, seeking cross-examination of PW1 at this stage to determine locus standi is unwarranted, particularly when the issue can be decided on the basis of pleadings and available materials. Further, considering the summary nature of rent control proceedings, permitting such a course would defeat the object of expeditious adjudication.

4. This Court finds no infirmity in the order of the Rent Controller. The revision petitioner, if so advised, is at liberty to establish his case by producing material evidence and not by way of cross-examination of PW1. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.