SANJEEV KUMAR Vs. DIWAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been preferred by the tenant against the judgment of the learned appellate Authority confirming the judgment and order of the learned Rent Controller (1), Kangra, allowing the petition for eviction instituted by respondent No. 1-landlord against the petitioner.

(2.) THE landlord had instituted the petition in the Court of learned Rent Controller, Kangra praying for a decree for eviction against the petitioner on the ground of sub-letting, change of user and the premises being required bonafide by him for construction etc.

(3.) WITHOUT entering into the merits of the rival contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties, it needs to be noticed that it was contended before the learned appellate Authority that the learned Rent Controller had not conducted the proceedings in accordance with law and that having kept the matter pending for long period of time, issues were framed on 3.5.2000, evidence of the land lord was recorded on 16.5.2000 and the petitioner had not been given reasonable opportunity to lead evidence in defence. On 16.5.2000, learned Rent Controller had directed the petitioner to produce his entire evidence on 24.5.2000. Thereafter on 29.5.2000 the matter was heard and decided. The contention raised by the tenant that the matter was decided with undue haste and that he had been condemned unheard was considered by the appellate Authority who, treated it in a slip shod manner holding that since the counsel for the respondents was present in the court, there was no question of petitioner- tenant being deprived of any opportunity of defending his case.