Dismissed

Joginder Singh v. Shishpal Singh

Punjab & Haryana HC10 May 2012CR/1041/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil revision, the Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside an order dismissing an application to recall witnesses for re-examination due to the unavailability of the original agreement to sell for a land transaction and granted a single chance to examine them on that issue.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of; petitioner granted one opportunity to examine PW1 and PW2 regarding the agreement to sell.

Joginder Singh Vs Shishpal Singh — Property and Title | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

Civil Revision No. 1041 of 2012

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Civil Revision No. 1041 of 2012 (O&M)

¶5

Date of decision : 10.5.2012

¶6

Joginder Singh .. Petitioner

¶7

versus

¶8

Shishpal Singh .. Respondent

¶9

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal

¶10

Present: Mr. Rose Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

None for the respondent.

¶12

Rajesh Bindal, J.

¶13

Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 24.1.2012 passed by the learned court below whereby the application filed by the petitioner for recalling of PW1 and PW2 for their re-examination to prove original agreement to sell dated 17.6.2006 has been dismissed.

¶14

At the time of issuance of notice of motion, the following contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner were noticed:-

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent entered into an agreement to sell 1,400 square yards of land to the petitioner on 17.6.2006 for a total consideration of 1,20,00,000/-. Earnest money of 25,00,000/- was paid. Later on, it was found that actual land owned by the respondent was merely 295 square yards. A complaint was filed with the police on 6.7.2006 on the basis of which FIR was registered. The original agreement to sell was taken into custody by the police and was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. It was received back by the court only on

¶16

Civil Revision No. 1041 of 2012

¶17

(2)

¶18

24.5.2011. The prayer of the petitioner before the court below was to re-call PW1-Balwant Singh, Stamp Vendor and PW2-Vikas Sihag, witness to the agreement, to prove the original agreement to sell. When their statements were recorded, the original agreement to sell was not available as it was with the Forensic Science Laboratory in the criminal case registered against the respondent.

¶19

Today learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that PW1 was examined on 12.6.2009 whereas PW2 was examined on 26.3.2010. As the original agreement to sell came to be placed on record on 24.1.2012, the aforesaid witnesses with reference to the aforesaid agreement could not be examined. PW1 is the stamp vender whereas PW2 is the witness to the agreement to sell.

¶20

Despite service, no one has appeared for the respondent.

¶21

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the submissions made above where on account of non availability of agreement to sell in original on the date of examination of the aforesaid witnesses, their statements could not recorded effectively, while setting aside the impugned order, one opportunity is granted to the petitioner to examine PW1 and PW2 only to the extent of agreement to sell.

¶22

The petition stands disposed of.

¶23

(Rajesh Bindal) Judge

¶24

10.5.2012 vs

Joginder Singh v. Shishpal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joginder Singh v. Shishpal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Om Prakash Vs Bal Kishan and Another

Darshan Kumar Vs Sant Ram and Others

Joginder Singh Vs Mukhtiar Kaur and Others

Gurmeet Kaur & Anr. Vs Gurjit Kaur & Ors.

Om Parkash and Anr. Vs Rameshwar and Ors.

Vipin Handa Vs Subhash Chander