This revision sought challenge to an order closing plaintiff evidence due to delay. The High Court found the closure justified by inordinate delay and callous attitude, dismissing the revision.
The civil revision petition was dismissed; the impugned order closing the plaintiffs' evidence was upheld.
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. 3142 of 2011
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
**Civil Revision No. 3142 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: 19.5.2011 *****
Kakka Singh & Ors.
.. Petitioners
Vs.
Jarnail Singh & Ors.
.. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR
**Present:Mr. L.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioners. *****
ARVIND KUMAR, J.
CM No. 13143-CII of 2011
Application is allowed. Annexure P-3 is taken on record.
CR No. 3142 of 2011.
By dint of order dated 21.4.2011 the evidence of petitionersplaintiffs has been closed by order of the Court and the same has been impugned in the present revision petition.
Heard.
The perusal of zimni orders placed on record reveals that issues in this case were framed on 5.12.2007 and the case since then was adjourned number of times for the evidence of the plaintiffs. On 18.11.2009 while adjourning the case for the evidence of the plaintiffs, they were warned to conclude their evidence by granting them the last opportunity. But despite that they did not conclude their evidence and even thereafter the case remained pending for the evidence of the petitioners for more than a year. On some occasion even costs were imposed upon them.Constrained
Civil Revision No. 3142 of 2011
2
with the callous attitude of the petitioners in pursuing their case, the learned Court below finding no other way, closed their evidence. There is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. Dismissed.
(ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE
May 19, 2011 Jiten
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the lower court was justified in closing the evidence of plaintiffs due to inordinate delay and failure to conclude despite warnings.
Kakka Singh & Ors.
Jarnail Singh & Ors.
Arvind Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
