Allowed

Rattan Singh v. Om Parkash and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Apr 2009CR/1838/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-Judge Bench set aside an order closing the petitioner's evidence in a civil suit, granting one opportunity to complete evidence before defendants' evidence, subject to payment of costs and strict adherence to the fixed date.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order setting aside; single opportunity granted for petitioner to complete evidence on fixed date; payment of Rs. 2,500 costs.

Rattan Singh Vs Om Parkash and Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

(1)

¶2

Civil Revision No 1838 of 2009

¶3

In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh

¶4

Civil Revision No. 1838 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 1.4.2009

Rattan Singh

..... Petitioner

Om Parkash and others

¶9

..... Respondents

¶10

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal

¶11

Present: Mr. Sanjay Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Rajesh Bindal J.

¶13

The petitioner who is plaintiff before the court below has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 4.3.2009 passed by the learned court below, whereby his evidence was closed by order of the court and the case was fixed for defendants' evidence.

¶14

For the view I am taking in the present petition, I do not deem it appropriate to issue notice to the respondents, as the same would unnecessarily delay not only the disposal of the present petition but the civil suit as well.

¶15

The proceedings in the present case arise out of a suit for declaration filed by petitioner/plaintiff against the respondents no. 1 to 3/ defendants.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on 4.3.2009, the learned court below, without appreciating the report of the process server and also the fact that one of the witnesses was not well, passed the impugned order. He further submitted that in case one opportunity is granted, the petitioner will complete his entire evidence on the date already fixed.

¶17

The facts submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner are borne out from the record. It is not a case where the petitioner was delying the matter by seeking adjournments and not leading evidence. One witness of the petitioner could not appear as he was ill and the other witness was not served which cannot be said the fault of the petitioner. The case is stated to be fixed before the learned court below on 9.4.2009 for evidence of the defendants.

¶18

Civil Revision No 1838 of 2009

¶19

(2)

¶20

Accordingly, while setting aside the impugned order dated 4.3.2009, closing the evidence of the petitioner, the learned court below is directed to grant one opportunity to the petitioner for completing his evidence on the date already fixed by the court before the evidence of the defendants is recorded. The same shall be subject to payment of Rs. 2,500/as costs to the respondents. The petitioner is at liberty to get the dasti summons issued for the witnesses. It is, however, made clear that no further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner in case he fails to complete his entire evidence on the date fixed.

¶21

The revision petition is disposed of in the manner indicated

¶22

above.

¶23

1.4.2009 vs.

¶24

( Rajesh Bindal) Judge

Rattan Singh v. Om Parkash and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rattan Singh v. Om Parkash and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narinder Singh Vs Narinder Kumar & Ors.

Ranjit Singh and Ors. Vs Verkha Kaur and Ors.

Baldev Singh Vs Haryana Roadways and Ors.

M/S Amar Singh Sohan Singh Vs Santokh Singh

Babu Lal Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Sudesh Kumar Aggarwal Vs M/S Gupta Roller Flour Mills