Allowed

Pritam Singh v. Tilak Raj & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Sept 2013CR/1818/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a revision petition filed by Pritam Singh against an order closing his evidence. The court directed the trial court to grant one more opportunity to the plaintiff for examining evidence upon compliance of payment of Rs. 5000 as costs precedent, noting that defendants should also get one chance if they have not closed evidence.

What did the court decide?

Revision petition allowed; trial court directed to grant one more opportunity to plaintiff for remaining evidence upon payment of Rs. 5000 costs precedent; defendants entitled to one more opportunity

Pritam Singh Vs Tilak Raj & Anr. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Civil Revision No. 1818 of 2013

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Civil Revision No. 1818 of 2013 Date of decision : September 10, 2013

Pritam Singh

....Petitioner

versus

Tilak Raj and another

¶9

....Respondents

¶10

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal

¶11

Present : Mr. Liaqat Ali, Advocate, for the petitioner

¶12

Mr. MS Sidhu, Advocate, for the respondents

¶13

L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral)

¶14

Plaintiff Pritam Singh has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning order dated 28.2.2013 Annexure P/1 passed by the trial court thereby closing evidence of the plaintiff by court order.

¶15

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Counsel for the petitioner prayed for only one more opportunity for remaining evidence of the plaintiff.

¶16

The prayer has been opposed by the counsel for the

¶17

Tiwana Dalbir Singh 2013.09.11 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document. High Court, Chandigarh

¶18

Civil Revision No. 1818 of 2013

¶19

-2-

¶20

respondents/defendants.

¶21

I have carefully considered the matter.

¶22

Perusal of zimini orders of the trial court as shown by counsel for the defendants reveals that the plaintiff was granted six opportunities in all for his evidence but he failed to conclude the same. Keeping in view all the circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be met if another opportunity is granted to the plaintiff for his remaining evidence at own responsibility subject to payment of costs.

¶23

Accordingly, the instant revision petition is allowed and trial court is directed to grant only one more opportunity to the plaintiffpetitioner for his remaining evidence at own responsibility subject to payment of ` 5000/- as costs precedent.

¶24

Counsel for the respondents/defendants stated that defendants have already closed their evidence. If it be so, then defendants/respondents shall be also granted one more opportunity for producing their further evidence, if any, after grant of aforesaid one more opportunity to the plaintiff-petitioner for his remaining evidence.

¶25

September 10, 2013 'dalbir'

¶26

Tiwana Dalbir Singh 2013.09.11 10:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document. High Court, Chandigarh

Pritam Singh v. Tilak Raj & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pritam Singh v. Tilak Raj & Anr.

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

Anil Kumar Puri Vs Hari Krishan Kakkar

Municipal Corporation (Council), Thanesar Vs Ravi Gupta

Jai Bhagwan Vs Attar Kala and Ors.

Raj Kumar Vs Paramjeet Kaur and Ors.

M/S B.S.Industries Darapur Vs State Bank of Patiala

Gulzari Vs Zile Singh