Dismissed

Gurmukh Singh v. Major Singh

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Mar 2011CR/1930/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This civil revision disposed of an appeal against an order allowing the respondent to exclude a supplementary affidavit. The High Court held the petitioner violated a prior order by tendering an unpermitted affidavit, having already cross-examined his evidence, and granted costs.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with a special cost of Rs. 10,000 imposed on the petitioner.

Gurmukh Singh Vs Major Singh — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

Civil Revision No. 1930 of 2010 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶3

Civil Revision No. 1930 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision:- 23.03.2011

Gurmukh Singh

....Petitioner

Vs.

Major Singh

....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL

¶10

¶11

Present:Mr. K.J.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. M.J.S. Bedi, Advocate, for the respondent.

¶13

A.N. JINDAL, J (ORAL)

¶14

This petition assails the order dated 14.01.2010 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Phul, whereby the application filed by the defendantrespondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent') for not taking into consideration the examination-in-chief of Gurmukh Singh-petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner') tendered in the shape of affidavit dated 23.04.2009, was allowed.

¶15

The facts essential for disposal of the present petition are that the petitioner had tendered his affidavit on 24.01.2008 and was cross-examined. Thereafter, he moved an application for producing in evidence an affidavit dated 26.08.2008 in order to show his presence before the Sub-Registrar on 30.05.2006 and got the said affidavit attested from him. The said application was

¶16

Civil Revision No. 1930 of 2010 2

¶17

allowed on 02.04.2009 and the petitioner was permitted to tender his affidavit dated 26.08.2008. Thereafter, case was adjourned ot 23.04.2009 for evidence of the petitioner. However, the petitioner again tendered affidavit dated 23.04.2009 on that day. Lateron, on coming to know about tendering the affidavit dated 23.04.2009 as against the order dated 02.04.2009 (Annexure P-2), the respondent moved an application for not taking into consideration the affidavit dated 23.04.2009. The said application was allowed.

¶18

Arguments heard. Record perused.

¶19

Since the petitioner had sought permission to tender the affidavit dated 26.08.2008 and the same was allowed vide order dated 02.04.2009, as such, tendering of another affidavit except affidavit dated 26.08.2008, was complete violation of the order dated 02.04.2009. Furthermore, since the petitioner had already tendered his affidavit in examination-in-chief on 24.01.2008 and was cross-examined thereover, therefore, tendering further affidavit dated 23.04.2009 without permission of the Court, was also not permissible. The petitioner appears to be guilty of concealment of facts.

¶20

As such, this petition is dismissed with special cost of

¶21

Rs.10,000/-.

¶22

23^rd of March, 2011 ajp

Gurmukh Singh v. Major Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurmukh Singh v. Major Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kewal Krishan Vs Paramjit Kaur

Ram Pal Vs Deepak Sharma

Manjit Singh Vs Raghbir Singh

Kesar Dass Vs Shri Sanatan Dharam Triveni Mandir Samiti & Ors.

Sarabjeet Singh Vs Pritam Kaur and Ors.

Ranjit Singh Vs Darshan Singh & Anr.