TEJINDERJIT SINGH BAINS AND ANR Vs. VIJAY KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 8.10.2010, passed by the learned Rent Controller, Jalandhar, whereby application moved by the landlord to examine Maninderjit Singh-Petitioner No. 2 in additional evidence, was rejected.

(2.) The brief facts of the present case are that initially mother of the Petitioners has filed eviction petition against the Respondent-tenant on the ground that the demised property is required by the landlord for the personal use and necessity. During the pendency of the eviction petition, landlord, mother of the Petitioners, expired. Petitioners were impleaded as L Rs of the original landlord and also filed amended application stating therein that Petitioner No. 2 Maninderjit Singh is unemployed youth and needs demised premises for his personal use and occupation to set up his own independent business therein.

(3.) Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, learned Senior Advocate, stated that Tejinderjit Singh-Petitioner No. 1 has appeared as one of the witnesses and stated on oath that property in question is required by Maninderjit Singh to start his own independent business, since Maninderjit Singh is unemployed youth. Learned Senior Advocate, states that just to avoid legal complications that Maninderjit Singh has not appeared in the witness box to state that he needs demised premises for his independent business, Petitioners want to produce Maninderjit Singh as additional witness.