Dismissed

Harmukh v. Kishan Lal and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Mar 2012CR/1518/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a civil revision petition challenging an order closing the petitioner's evidence in a suit. The Court found the delay unexplained due to a mistaken attempt to file a criminal revision against a civil order and found no merit in the challenge.

What did the court decide?

Petition for revision consequentially allowed and the impugned order dismissing the suit was confirmed.

Harmukh Vs Kishan Lal and Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

Civil Revision No. 1518 of 2012 [1]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

Civil Revision No. 1518 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.3.2012

¶4

Harmukh

¶5

Vs.

¶6

Kishan Lal and others

¶7

.. Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

¶9

Present: Mr. Sunil Saharan, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Rajesh Bindal J.

¶11

Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 14.5.2011, passed by the learned court below, whereby the evidence of the petitioner and respondents No. 5 and 6 ( hereinafter described as `the plaintiffs') was closed by order of the court.

¶12

It is a suit filed by the plaintiffs for claiming damages/compensation on account of injuries caused to them by the defendants in the suit. The learned court below, while noticing that the plaintiffs had availed of several opportunities for leading their evidence but failed to conclude the same, closed the same by order of the court on 14.5.2011.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to justify the delay in filing the petition in this court by stating that under mistaken advice, the plaintiffs had filed a revision in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge. However, finding that the same was not maintainable, it was withdrawn on 16.2.2012. Immediately thereafter, the present petition was filed.

¶14

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any merit in the submissions made. The learned court below has

¶15

Civil Revision No. 1518 of 2012 [2]

¶16

specifically noticed in the impugned order dated 14.5.2011 that despite availing numerous opportunities, the plaintiffs failed to conclude their evidence, hence, the same was closed by order of the court. How a criminal revision was filed before the learned Additional Sessions Judge against the order passed by the civil court in the suit filed by the plaintiffs claiming damages could not be explained. The mistake cannot be said to be bonafide which can be taken as a basis for entertaining a petition impugning the order dated 14.5.2011.

¶17

For the reasons mentioned above, the present petition is

¶18

dismissed.

¶19

( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge

¶20

12.3.2012 mk

Harmukh v. Kishan Lal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harmukh v. Kishan Lal and Ors.

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

Sadhu Singh Vs State of Pb.

Gurpal Singh Vs State of Pb.

State of Punjab Vs Gurdev Singh

Sultan Singh and Others Vs Kartar Singh and Others

Punjab Wakf Board Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

M/S Indian Oil Corp. Ltd. Vs M/S Anuj Filling Station etc.