JUDGMENT 1. - By way of instant petition u/Art. 226 of the Constitution of India the defendant-petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.4.2004 passed by the Judge, Rent Tribunal Cum Civil Judge (Sr. Division) No. 1, Udaipur in Civil Original Suit No. 58/2003 whereby he rejected the application filed by him to permit cross-examination of the remaining plaintiffs witnesses in view of the Provisions of Sec. of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2001'). The defendant-petitioner has also challenged the constitutional validity of Section 21 of the Act of 2001. 2. Mr. Om Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff-respondents, concedes that the impugned order dated 13.4.2004 deserves to to be set aside. He further submits that the defendant should be allowed the cross- examination of the plaintiff's witnesses in terms of the prayer made in the application. 3. In view of the concession made, the challenge to the validity of Section 2' of the Act of 2001 remains academic. As the substantial relief has been 15 granted to the petitioner, there is no useful purpose for keeping the instant petition pending. 4. Consequently, the order of the Judge, Rent Tribunal Cum Civil Judge (Sr. Division) No. 1, Udaipur dated 13.4.2004 is set aside. The application filed by the defendant-petitioner under section 21 of the Act of 2001 is allowed. Mr. Om Mehta learned counsel submits that he will keep all the witnesses present on the next date of hearing i.e. 10.9.2004. We expect that the parties will operate with the Tribunal in expeditious disposal of the proceedings. The Petitioner is disposed of without prejudice to the challenge of the constitutional validity of provisions of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001. *******