Allowed

Tejinder Singh Bhatia v. Hari Singh Rao

Punjab & Haryana HC28 Oct 2014CR/7241/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil revision petition regarding a property dispute, the Court allowed the petitioner-tenant one additional opportunity to examine a witness due to the witness's close relation dying unexpectedly. Costs of ₹2,000 were imposed to be paid before the Rent Controller.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed one more opportunity to examine witness Satnam Singh at his own responsibility upon payment of ₹2,000 costs to the Rent Controller.

Tejinder Singh Bhatia Vs Hari Singh… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

CR-7241-2014

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Civil Revision No.7241 of 2014 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 28, 2014.

¶5

Tejinder Singh Bhatia

¶6

......PETITIONER(s).

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

Hari Singh Rao

¶9

....RESPONDENT(s).

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr. G.N. Malik, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

¶12

¶13

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶14

Heard.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner-tenant submits that despite his undertaking, the revision petitioner could not produce the only witness left to be examined namely Satnam Singh, due to the death in his relationship. An application was moved, seeking further adjournment apprising the Court about the circumstances but the evidence of petitioner-tenant was closed by Court order. He further submits that name of Satnam Singh was mentioned in the list of witnesses placed on record. He undertakes to examine Satnam Singh, at own responsibility, if allowed one more opportunity.

¶16

The perusal of the order dated 06.10.2014 shows that

¶17

SACHIN MEHTA 2014.10.29 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶18

CR-7241-2014

¶19

-2-

¶20

revision petitioner was allowed four effective opportunities to produce his evidence. Earlier on 10.09.2014, the revision petitioner had given undertaking and the Rent Controller has allowed last opportunity for 06.10.2014. On 06.10.2014, counsel for the revision petitioner moved application seeking further adjournment due to sudden demise of close relation of witness Satnam Singh but his request was declined.

¶21

In view of the undertaking of learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the interim orders passed by the Rent Controller, after the case was fixed for evidence, this revision petition is allowed, subject to payment of `2,000 as costs. The petitioner will tender the costs on the next date of hearing before the Rent Controller. On payment of costs, he will be allowed one more opportunity to examine witness Satnam Singh. He will produce the witness at his own responsibility.

¶22

This order has been passed without notice to the respondent in order to avoid further delay and and unnecessary expenses for the respondent. However, if the respondent-landlord feels any grievance against this order, he will be at liberty to move an application which will be listed for hearing along with file of this revision petition.

¶23

( SURINDER GUPTA ) October 28, 2014. JUDGE Sachin M.

¶24

SACHIN MEHTA 2014.10.29 18:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Tejinder Singh Bhatia v. Hari Singh Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tejinder Singh Bhatia v. Hari Singh Rao

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

Pawan Kumar Vs Mohanjit Singh and Another

Gori Narang Vs Davinder Singh

Vikram Vs Kavita Aggarwal

Anupam Behal Vs Janak Raj Sethi

Nishan Isngh Vs M/S Achhru Ram Sanjiv Kumar

Karnail Singh Vs Naib Singh and Ors.