JUDGMENT 1. - This writ petition is directed against order dated 28.5.13 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur Metropolitan City, whereby an application preferred on behalf of the respondent-landlord seeking leave to cross examine the witnesses produced on behalf of the petitioner-tenant, stands allowed. 2. The respondent-landlord has filed a petition seeking eviction of the petitioner-tenant from the disputed premises, a shop, on the ground of bona fide requirement. The petition is being contested by the petitioner-tenant by filing a reply thereto. 3. The respondent-landlord preferred an application seeking leave to cross examine the witnesses produced on behalf of the petitioner-tenant stating that the assertions of the witnesses as contained in the affidavits filed suffer from contradiction. The petitioner-tenant also filed an application seeking leave to cross examine the witnesses whose affidavits have been filed on behalf of the respondent-landlord. 4. After due consideration, the Rent Tribunal has permitted both the parties to cross examine the witnesses produced on behalf of the party opposite. The petitioner-tenant is aggrieved by permission granted for cross-examination to the respondent-landlord. Hence, this petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in terms of provisions of Section 21 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short "the Act"), a party cannot claim cross examination of the witnesses as a matter of right. Learned counsel submitted that while seeking leave to cross examine the witnesses, the reasons therefor must be specified in the application preferred. It is submitted that the proceedings before the Rent Tribunal being summary in nature, the cross examination of witnesses cannot be permitted by the Rent Tribunal in routine manner. Learned counsel submitted that the averments made in the reply to the petition having not been disputed by the respondent-landlord, it cannot claim right to cross examine the petitioner-tenant. Accordingly, it is submitted that the order impugned passed by the Rent Tribunal suffers from error apparent on the face of record. 6. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and perused the material on record. 7. Accordingly, it is submitted that the order impugned passed by the Rent Tribunal suffers from error apparent on the face of record. 6. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and perused the material on record. 7. As per provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 21 of the Act, the Rent Tribunal and the Appellate Rent Tribunal are not bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 but, shall be guided by principles of natural justice and subject to other provisions of the Act or rules made thereunder, shall have power to regulate its own procedure and for the purpose of discharging their function under the Act, shall have same powers as are vested in civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 while trying the suit or an appeal in respect of the matters specifically enumerated. In the considered opinion of this court, Section 21 of the Act gives wide powers to the Rent Tribunal and Appellate Rent Tribunal to even call any witness for examination or cross examination, as may be necessary, in the interest of justice. Merely because, the averments made in the reply to the petition have not been controverted by the respondent-landlord by filing any rejoinder thereto, he cannot be denied an opportunity to cross examine the witnesses produced on behalf of the petitioner tenant in support of the defence set out on his behalf. 8. In this view of the matter, in the considered opinion of this court, the judicial discretion exercised by the Rent Tribunal in permitting both the parties to cross examine the witnesses produced on behalf of the party opposite, does not suffer from any jurisdictional error so as to warrant interference by this court in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 9. In the result, the petition fails, it is hereby dismissed in limine.Petition Dismissed. *******