AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
13 paragraphs · 255 wordsR.K.Gauba, J
The petitioner is a respondent in the proceedings arising out of the eviction petition No.25777/16 (new), 131/12 (old) initiated by the respondents
herein seeking his eviction on the ground under Section 14(1)(e) of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958.
By the impugned order dated 27.03.2017 the right of the petitioner to lead evidence was closed taking note at length of the dilatory tactics adopted
by him or at his instance by his counsel, some reference to the previous conduct of the counsel having also been made in the order.
After some hearing, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that though the order and the reasons set out therein cannot be faulted, in all
fairness, so as not to deny effective opportunity to the petitioner, one indulgence may be shown to facilitate opportunity for evidence to be adduced by
him subject to appropriate terms.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances in the backdrop as noted in the impugned order, with deference to the concession given by the
counsel for the respondents, the impugned order is set aside subject to costs of Rs.50,000/- and further condition that the petitioner will be entitled to
lead evidence before the Rent Controller in the case in question, producing himself and other witnesses that he wishes to examine, all in one go, on the
date to be fixed for such purposes by the Rent Controller as per convenience of his calendar.
The petition and the pending application are disposed of with these observations.