Partly allowed

Bhagwan Singh v. Bbmb and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Dec 2010CR/8262/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a petition challenging an order striking off the petitioner's defence for non-production of documents. It directed the trial court to fix a date for the petitioner to produce all evidence within no further adjournment, imposing a cost of Rs. 5000 on the respondents, and allowed the respondents to move to recall this order if aggrieved.

What did the court decide?

Directing the trial court to fix a date for the petitioner to lead evidence with no further adjournment, imposing a cost of Rs. 5000 on the respondents, and allowing respondents to seek recall of the

Bhagwan Singh Vs Bbmb and Anr. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

C.R. No. 8262 of 2010

¶3

Date of Decision: 20.12.2010

Bhagwan Singh

.... Petitioner

Versus

Bhakra Beas Management Board and another

¶8

... Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH

¶10

Present : Mr. Vivek K. Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner

¶11

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶12

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL)

¶14

Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 13.10.2010 passed by Estate Officer, BBMB, Nangal Township whereby defence of the petitioner was directed to be struck off for not producing documents in support of his defence despite of giving sufficient opportunities to the petitioner to lead evidence.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that documents sought to be produced in the defence evidence were not in the custody of the petitioner-defendant, hence, time was sought to produce the documents from the custody of the other side. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that on the date either fixed by this Court or by the learned Trial Court, entire evidence shall be produced before the learned Trial Court and no further adjournment shall be sought.

¶16

¶17

C.R. No. 8262 of 2010

¶18

Learned Single Judge of this Court in the matter of Prem Lata Vs. Ram Sarup reported in 2005(4) RCR (Civil) 423 placing reliance on judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Batala Machine Tools Workshop Coop. vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur has held that matter can be disposed of at the stage of admission without any notice to the opposite party, because if the respondent is summoned to contest this litigation, it may involve huge expenditure and unnecessary harassment and delay of the proceedings.

¶19

In the opinion of this Court, present matter can be disposed of at the admission stage without any notice to the respondents. This Court is of the further opinion that issuing notice to the respondents shall cause unnecessary delay in the disposal of the matter, hence, this Court proposes to decide this petition without notice to the respondents.

¶20

In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in mind, the golden rule that none should be given walk over and lis between the parties, as far as possible, should be decided at its own merit after affording sufficient opportunities to both the parties to place on record entire evidence and material, this Court direct that learned trial Court shall fix a date for the purpose of petitioner’s evidence. On the date so fixed, petitioner shall produce all the evidence before the learned trial Court. However, it is made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted to the petitioner. Petitioner shall pay cost of ` 5000/- to the respondents on or before the next date so fixed by the trial Court. If respondents feel

¶21

C.R. No. 8262 of 2010

¶22

¶23

aggrieved from this order, they shall be at liberty to move this Court for recalling of the order.

¶24

Petition shall stand disposed of accordingly.

¶25

(ALOK SINGH) JUDGE

¶26

20.12.2010 reena

Bhagwan Singh v. Bbmb and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagwan Singh v. Bbmb and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Haryana etc. Vs Vinod Tayal

Group 4 Securitas India Pvt, Ltd, Mohali Vs Surya Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Chd

Ameet Singh and Anr. Vs Gurmel Singh and Ors.

Balkrishan Vs Anju Bala and Another

Pawan Kumar Singla Vs Prabhjot Singh and Anr.

Harbans Vs Sadhu Ram and Ors.