Civil revision petition challenging orders that closed evidence and set 'own risk' rule. Court granted one more opportunity for cross-examination subject to payment of Rs.2000 costs and set aside impugned orders.
Impugned orders set aside; one opportunity granted for cross-examination subject to payment of Rs. 2000 costs.
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.
Civil Revision No.6777 of 2010
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No.6777 of 2010 Date of decision : 14-10-2010
Gurdip Singh
.... Petitioner
VERSUS
Vivek Aggarwal
....Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG
Present: Ms. Monika Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
RAKESH KUMAR GARG J.
This is plaintiff's revision petition challenging the impugned order dated 22.07.2010 whereby his evidence was closed by order of the Court and subsequently his application for setting aside the aforesaid order was dismissed vide order dated 8.09.2010.
Challenging the aforesaid orders, counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that petitioner was not at fault as the witness of the plaintiff was present in Court but due to some unavoidable circumstances, he could not be cross-examined. Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that no prejudice is going to be caused to the respondent as their evidence is yet to start and moreover, the defendant-respondent can be compensated suitably by costs. It has been further stated before this Court that plaintiff wants to complete the cross-examination of the witness whose
Civil Revision No.6777 of 2010
-2-
examination-in-chief has already been recorded and therefore one opportunity be granted to complete the cross-examination of his witness at his own risk and responsibility.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner to complete the cross-examination of this witness whose examinationin-chief has already been conducted subject to payment of costs which are assessed at Rs.2000/-.
Consequently, the impugned orders are set aside.
Let the petitioner appear along with his witness on the date fixed and tender the costs as assessed. On his doing so, the trial Court will allow the petitioner to complete his evidence by way of cross-examination of the witness. It is further clarified that no further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner and he shall be responsible for conducting the evidence of witness at his own risk and responsibility.
Copy of the order be given dasti on payment of usual
charges.
(RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE
14-10-2010 manju
2 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioner should be granted a second chance to cross-examine witness after initial closure of evidence.
Impugned orders closing evidence and dismissing application to set them aside to be quashed with costs.
Gurdip Singh
Vivek Aggarwal
Rakesh Kumar Garg
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
