Petitioner filed a civil revision challenging an order allowing defendants to examine a handwriting expert to rebut plaintiff's expert evidence in a permanent injunction suit. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding no material irregularity existed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No. 5974 of 2009(O&M) Date of Order: 15.10.2009
Darbara Singh @ Dalbara Singh
.....Petitioner
Versus
Paramjit Singh and others
.....Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE SABINA.
Present: Mr. Rajesh Puri,Advocate, for the petitioner.
SABINA, J.(Oral)
The plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction
restraining the defendants from alienating the suit property.
On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by
the trial court:
After the close of defendant's evidence, plaintiff-petitioner
examined finger and handwritting expert in his rebuttal, appearing on the affidavit Ex.P-12. The plaintiff-petitioner was allowed to examine the expert in rebuttal vide order (Annexure P-15) dated 29.01.2009. Vide the impugned order, the defendants have been allowed to examine the handwritting expert to rebut the report submitted by the expert examined by the plaintiff. Hence, the present revision petition.
Civil Revision No. 5974 of 2009(O&M)
..2..
After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition is liable to be dismissed.
A perusal of the issues framed by the trial court reveals that the onus to prove issue No.1, as to whether the plaintiff was entitled to permanent injunction as prayed for, was on the plaintiff-petitioner. The remaining three issues i.e issues no.2 to 4 are legal in nature. Since the plaintiff-petitioner was allowed to examine an expert in rebuttal qua issue no.1 with regard to which the onus was on the plaintiff, the learned trial court has rightly granted an opportunity to the defendants to examine an expert to rebut the report submitted by the handwritting expert examined by the plaintiff-petitioner.
The paramount duty of the Court is to do justice. The rules of procedure and technicalities of law cannot stand in the way. Vide the impugned order, substantial justice has been done between the parties. The impugned order does not suffer from any material irregularity or illegality warranting interference by this Court.
Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.
(SABINA) Judge
15.10.2009 Seema-II
Darbara Singh @ Dalbara Singh
Paramjit Singh and others
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
