Single judge granted revision under Article 227, setting aside order that closed petitioner's evidence, allowing two further opportunities to conclude evidence upon payment of costs.
Impugned order dated 16.5.2013 set aside; two opportunities granted to conclude evidence; cost of Rs.3000/- awarded.
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.
CR 4837/2013
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR 4837/2013 Date of decision:14/08/2013
Kamal Singh
.............Petitioner
v.
Adarsh Gaushala and others
.............Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present:Mr.Vikrant Rana,Advocate for the petitioner/plaintiff
Jaswant Singh,J.(Oral)
The plaintiff/petitioner is in revision under Article 227 of the Constitution assailing the order dated 16.5.2013(P1) passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr.Div.)Charkhi Dadri whereby his evidence has been closed by order of the Court.
After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, perusing the averments made in the petition, keeping in view the serious nature of the lis between the parties and coupled with the fact that the petitioner has not been thoroughly negligent inasmuch as he has already examined two witnesses, I deem it expedient in the interest of justice to grant two effective opportunities to the petitioner/plaintiff to conclude his entire evidence subject to payment of reasonable costs.Joshi Rajinder Prashad
Joshi Rajinder Prashad 2013.08.14 15:54 I attest to the accuracy of this Order. High Court, Chandigarh.
2
CR 4837/2013
Accordingly, present revision petition is allowed, impugned order dated 16.5.2013 (P1) is set aside and petitioner is granted two effective opportunities to conclude his entire evidence subject to payment of costs of Rs.3000/- to be paid to respondent no.1 by way of demand draft.
This order is being passed without issuing notice to respondent to avoid further delay in the matter and to save it from avoidable litigation expenses. Moreover, respondent is being compensated by way of reasonable costs.
Disposed of.
14.08.2013. joshi
(Jaswant Singh) Judge
Joshi Rajinder Prashad 2013.08.14 15:54 I attest to the accuracy of this Order. High Court, Chandigarh.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to allow the revision petition where the lower court erroneously closed the petitioner's evidence.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kamal Singh
Adarsh Gaushala and others
Jaswant Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
