Chandigarh HC allowed a revision petition regarding an order that required petitioner-defendants to pay costs before being granted opportunities to lead evidence under Order 16 Rule 1-A CPC.
The impugned order was set aside and the revision petition was allowed.
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 No.2047 of 2016
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR No.2047 of 2016 Date of decision:18.03.2016
Paramjit Singh and another
... Petitioners
Vs.
Surjit Singh and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
Present:Mr. Malkeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.
AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral)
Mr. Malkeet Singh, learned counsel for the petitionerdefendants submits that evidence of the petitioner-defendants has been closed by order. He seeks three effective opportunities to lead evidence as the issues in the suit were framed on 05.12.2013, whereas, evidence of the respondent-plaintiffs was closed on 07.09.2015.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitionerdefendants and appraised the paper book and of the view that sufficient opportunities have not been granted to the petitionerdefendants and accorded them two effective opportunities to lead evidence by taking the aid of provisions of Order 16 Rule 1-A of the Code of Civil Procedure and as well as, by taking assistance of the
SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2016.03.28 12:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
CR No.2047 of 2016
{2}
Court, in case, witnesses be summoned, subject to payment of costs of `5,000/- which shall be condition precedent.
In view of the aforementioned observations, the impugned
order is set aside and the revision petition is allowed.
(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE
March 18, 2016 savita
SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2016.03.28 12:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner-defendants requiring an opportunity to lead evidence pursuant to Order 16 Rule 1-A CPC.
Whether an order setting aside an impugned order allowing two effective opportunities to lead evidence on condition precedent of payment of costs.
Amit Rawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
