The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed a petition seeking to allow plaintiffs to lead evidence after the defendants had already been examined, but granted liberty to appeal to the Appellate Court under Section 105 CPC.
Petition dismissed; liberty granted to agitate before Appellate Court under Section 105 CPC.
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
C.R. No. 8305 of 2010
Date of Decision: 21.12.2010
State of Punjab and others
.... Petitioners
Versus
Joginder Lal and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH
Present : Mr. Satish Bhanot, Addl. A.G. Punjab for the petitioners
ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL)
Mr. Satish Bhanot, Addl. A.G. Punjab fairly stated that
after the impugned order, defendants witnesses have already been examined.
In view of this, I do not find reason to permit the plaintiffs to lead evidence after the evidence of the defendants.
Petition is dismissed.
However, liberty is granted to the petitioners-plaintiffs to agitate before the Appellate Court by invoking Section 105 CPC that evidence of the plaintiffs was wrongly closed.
(ALOK SINGH) JUDGE
reena
21.12.2010
1 issue framed by the court
Whether plaintiffs can be permitted to lead evidence after defendants have already testified.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Punjab
Joginder Lal
others
Allok Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
