KAMAL TRADING CO Vs. AMOLAK RAM OM PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent No. 1 has been served. None appears on its behalf. Ex parte against it.

(2.) After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners I am of the view that this revision petition deserves to succeed. The petitioner, who alleges to be tenant of the premises in dispute, was cross-examining Bhagwan Dass, partner of the landlord firm, who appeared as A. W. 7. while his cross- examination was going on at the instance of the petitioner, the learned Rent Controller passed the following order :

(3.) I find merit in the contention. The short order passed by the Rent Controller does not convey the reason for closing the cross-examination except that the cross examination was lengthy. This is no ground for closing the cross-examination in law because cross-examination, whether short or lengthy, would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case.