Dismissed

Ravinder Kaur v. Ajaib Singh & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Sept 2014CR/5943/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed this revision petition filed under Article 227 to quash an order recalling a witness for cross-examination in a civil suit. Upholding the lower court's order, the Bench held that a lapse by counsel in handing-dismissing cross-examination is excusable to prevent irreparable loss to the plaintiffs.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order recalling DW Ravinder Kaur for cross-examination upheld; revision petition dismissed.

Ravinder Kaur Vs Ajaib Singh & Anr. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

112

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CR No.5943 of 2014 Date of decision: September 03, 2014

Ravinder Kaur

...Petitioner

Versus

Ajaib Singh and another

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

¶10

Present: Mr.S.S.Rangi, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

¶12

INDERJIT SINGH, J.

¶13

Petitioner Ravinder Kaur has filed this revision petition against Ajaib Singh and Vijay Pal respondents under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the impugned order dated 05.07.2014 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bathinda.

¶14

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

¶15

From the record, I find that as per the order dated 14.03.2014, the copy of which is Annexure P-3 on the record, DW Ravinder Kaur was present for cross-examination but none appeared on behalf of the plaintiffs and the Court treated the cross-examination of DW Ravinder Kaur as opportunity given nil and DW Ravinder Kaur was discharged and the case was fixed for 04.04.2014 for evidence of

¶16

VINEET GULATIthe defendant. In the meantime, plaintiffs filed an application for 2014.09.08 16:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶17

CR No.5943 of 2014

¶18

-2-

¶19

recalling DW Ravinder Kaur for the purpose of cross-examination. Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bathinda vide impugned order dated 05.07.2014, after hearing the parties, allowed this application by holding that in the present case, Ravinder Kaur is one of the material witness and her non-examination may effect the decision of the case, and by discussing the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.Sanjeeva Rao vs. State of Andra Pradesh 2013(3) R.A.J. 426 (Supreme Court) in which it is held that where the witnesses are not cross-examined due to mistake of lawyer, the witnesses can be recalled for cross-examination. In the present case also, there is mistake of the counsel, who has not cross-examined Ravinder Kaur, who is defendant in this case. If she is not cross-examined, then her statement will remain unchallenged by the other party and it will cause irreparable loss to the plaintiffs. If the witness is recalled and crossexamined, then the Court will be able to determine the rights of the parties on merit substantially. The respondents/plaintiffs have already been burdened with ` 1000/- as costs.

¶20

In view of the above discussion, the impugned order dated 05.07.2014 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bathinda is correct and as per law and the same is upheld.

¶21

Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

¶22

September 03, 2014 Vgulati

¶23

(INDERJIT SINGH) JUDGE

¶24

VINEET GULATI 2014.09.08 16:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Ravinder Kaur v. Ajaib Singh & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravinder Kaur v. Ajaib Singh & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tarsem Singh Vs Kamlesh Kumari and Anr.

Fauja Singh Vs Samitter Singh

Swaran Chand Vs Balwinder Singh & Anr.

Mohan Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Jaibir Vs Sheela Devi

Sanjiv Garg and Ors. Vs Punjab Rban Planning & Development Authority