Disposed

Mehboob Hassan v. Mehmood Hassan & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Nov 2015CR/7291/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

, The High Court disposed of a revision petition challenging a Civil Judge's order. The Court directed the trial court to afford an opportunity for the further cross-examination of the witness Mehmood Hassan (DW1). The plaintiff bears the consequence if the examination is not completed on the fixed date.

What did the court decide?

, The Court directed the trial court to afford an opportunity for further cross-examination of DW1. The plaintiff shall suffer if the cross-examination is not conducted on the date fixed by the trial

Mehboob Hassan Vs Mehmood Hassan… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 134

¶2

Civil Revision No.7291 of 2015

¶3

Date of Decision: November 02, 2015

Mehboob Hassan

…… APPELLANT

VERSUS

Mehmood Hassan & others

¶8

….. RESPONDENTS

¶9

CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH

¶10

PRESENT: Mohd. Salim, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

Whether Reports of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶12

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

Jaspal Singh, J

¶14

Challenge in this revision petition is to order dated

¶15

October 3,2015 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mewat whereby the prayer of petitioner for recalling witness, namely,

¶16

Mehmood Hassan, DW1 for cross examination has been declined.

¶17

This Court is of the considered view that issuance of any notice of revision petition to the respondents would be burdensome in view of the nature of order to be passed for disposal thereof.

¶18

AVIN KUMAR 2015.11.16 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh

¶19

CR No,7291 of 2015

¶20

Vide the impugned order, cross examination of DW1 was declined and a request made in this behalf was also dismissed. A perusal of the impugned order transpires that DW1 was present in Court for cross-examination. His cross-examination was started but due

¶21

to lunch break, further cross-examination was deferred for conducting the same after lunch. Thereafter, counsel for the plaintiff did not appear and the reason furnished was that he was busy in some other court.

¶22

Without commenting upon the impugned order, instant

¶23

revision petition is disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to afford an opportunity for the purpose of further cross examination of DW1 (Mehmood Hassan) and in case the cross examination is not conducted/completed on the date so fixed, plaintiff shall have to suffer.

¶24

AVIN KUMAR 2015.11.16 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh

Mehboob Hassan v. Mehmood Hassan & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mehboob Hassan v. Mehmood Hassan & 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

Krishna Devi and Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Sukhwinder Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Seema Begum and Ors. Vs Oic and Ors.

Municipal Committee Narnaul and Anr. Vs Dalip Singh and Ors.

Gurpreet Singh and Ors. Vs Avtar Singh and Anr.

Sunita & Ors. Vs Ram Bhaj & Ors.