IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 02.04.2026 Vikas Bassi ...... Petitioner versus Sanatan Dharam Parcharak Sabha (Regd.) & others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present: Mr. Ashish Nagar, Advocate for the petitioner.

****

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (Oral)

1. This is second time that the petitioner is before this Court aggrieved of the orders passed by the Rent Controller closing his evidence by order.

2. In the earlier round, CR No.7254 of 2025 filed by the present petitioner was disposed off vide order dated 13.10.2025 observing as under:-

“1. Challenge is to the order dated 14.07.2025 (Annexure P-4) and that dated 28.08.2025 (Annexure P-7), whereby application filed by the petitioner seeking recalling of the order dated 14.07.2025 stands dismissed.

2. Petitioner is one of the LRs of respondent-tenant, who is facing ejectment proceedings. By way of impugned order, evidence of the petitioner has been ordered to be closed. It has been noticed by the Rent Controller while passing order that 11 effective opportunities already stand availed by the tenant, yet he has failed to produce the evidence.

3. Though, there is no cogent reason for grant of any further opportunity, as the conduct of the petitioner disentitles him for any indulgence, yet in the interest of justice, one more opportunity is granted to the petitioner to lead his entire evidence.

4. The next date before the Rent Controller is stated to be 16.10.2025. On that date, the petitioner shall produce copy of the order before the Rent Controller, who shall grant him one effective opportunity to lead his entire evidence, subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as cost to be paid to the landlord.

5. Keeping in view the innocuous relief granted, this Court has disposed off the present revision petition without issuing notice to the respondents. However, in case the respondents feel aggrieved of the order, they are granted liberty to move an appropriate application seeking recalling of the order.

6. Ordered accordingly.”

3. Despite indulgence having been granted by this Court, the respondent remained inert and has shown least respect for the orders even passed by this Court. The same led to passing of the impugned order by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Ludhiana observing as under:-

“xx xx xx Hence, keeping in view the opportunities given to RW1 Vikas Bassi for his cross examination, this court is of the view that he has failed to comply with the orders of the Court despite availing numerous opportunities including super last and final opportunities. It seems that RW1 Vikas Bassi is trying to misuse the concession of opportunities given to him by this Court on numerous occasions for his cross examination, therefore, finding no further justification to grant adjournment time and again, as the case pertains to the year 2016 and already 9 years old and comes under the category of action plan cases, as such, respondent evidence of LR No.1 stands closed by order.xxx”

4. Keeping in view the conduct of the petitioner, this Court finds no reason to entertain the present revision petition. The same is ordered to be dismissed.

(PANKAJ JAIN)

JUDGE

02.04.2026

Dinesh

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes

Whether Reportable : No