Allowed

Rajiv Bhatia v. Kuldip Kaur and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Feb 2015CR/1196/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner in revision sought one more opportunity to conclude evidence in a specific performance suit where his counsel failed to appear. The High Court allowed the revision, set aside the closure order, and granted the chance subject to deposit of costs.

What did the court decide?

Revision allowed; impugned order set aside; petitioner granted one opportunity to conclude evidence subject to payment of costs.

Rajiv Bhatia Vs Kuldip Kaur and Ors. — Specific Performance | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

CR 1196/2015

111

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

Date of decision:20.02.2015.

¶6

Rajiv Bhatia

¶7

.............Petitioner

¶8

¶9

Kuldip Kaur and others

¶10

.............Respondent

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶12

Present:Mr.Nitin Kaushal,Advocate for the petitioner

¶13

Jaswant Singh,J.(Oral)

¶14

Petitioner/plaintiff is in revision aggrieved by the order dated 20.1.2015 (P-20) passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division) Jalandhar whereby in a suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 16.12.2004, his evidence has been closed by order.

¶15

It is submitted that on 20.1.2015 when the impugned order came to be passed, petitioner was busy with the cremation of his fatherin-law whereas counsel for the petitioner did not appear for the reasons best known to him and as such cause of the petitioner should not be permitted to suffer. It is further submitted that the only evidence petitioner wants to lead is to complete his cross examination and to produce some documents by an official witness from the office of SSP. In these circumstances, one opportunity subject to imposition of costs as this court may deem fit, is requested.

¶16

After hearing the learned counsel and perusing the paperRAJINDER PRASHAD JOSHI 2015.02.21 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh.

¶17

CR 1196/2015

¶18

2 111

¶19

book, I deem it expedient in the interest of justice to grant petitioner one opportunity at his own risk and responsibility to complete his evidence.

¶20

Accordingly, present revision petition is allowed, impugned order dated 20.1.2015 (P-20) is set aside and the petitioner is granted one opportunity to conclude his evidence, at his own risk and responsibility subject to payment of Rs.3000/- as costs to be deposited with District Legal Service Authority,Jalandhar. Payment of costs shall be a condition precedent for availing the opportunity so granted.

¶21

This order is being passed without issuing notice to respondents to avoid further delay in the matter and to save them from litigation expenses.

¶22

20.02.2015 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge

¶23

RAJINDER PRASHAD JOSHI 2015.02.21 12:31 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh.

Rajiv Bhatia v. Kuldip Kaur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv Bhatia v. Kuldip Kaur 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

M/S Superior Industries Ltd. Vs Pres. Off Indu. Trib Cum Lab Court I Faridabad and Anr.

Sandeep Kumar through Lrs Sandeep Kumar and Anr.and Anr. Vs Bipen Kumar etc.

Jarnail Singh and Anr. Vs Amar Singh

Paramjit Singh Vs Election Tribunal Cum Sdm and Ors.

Umed Singh and Ors. Vs Som Dev and Ors.

Sarla Devi Vs Jasbir Singh