Cross-examination in summary rent proceedings is not automatic; it depends on necessity for justice and truth-finding.

Under the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972, affidavit evidence is permissible in summary proceedings, but cross-examination of a deponent is not available as of right. The Prescribed Authority may allow cross-examination only when it is necessary for the ends of justice and for eliciting the truth. Where the affidavit's credibility can be tested through a rebuttal affidavit and supporting documents, refusal to permit cross-examination is justified, and writ interference is not warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in proceedings under the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972, a party is entitled as of right to cross-examine the deponent of an affidavit filed in support of an application, and whether the writ court should interfere with the order rejecting such cross-examination.

Analysis: The governing scheme under the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 is designed for expeditious disposal and does not make the Code of Civil Procedure fully applicable as of right. Affidavit evidence is permissible, but cross-examination of a deponent is not automatic; it depends on whether the Prescribed Authority is satisfied that such cross-examination is necessary for the ends of justice and for eliciting truth. Where the credibility of an affidavit can be tested by rebuttal affidavit and documentary material, and the request for cross-examination is not shown to be necessary, rejection of such an application is justified.

Conclusion: The refusal to permit cross-examination was upheld and no interference was warranted in writ jurisdiction.

---