The High Court set aside an order closing the petitioner's evidence, granting one effective opportunity to conclude evidence subject to payment of Rs. 5,000 costs, and allowed the revision petition.
Impugned order set aside; petitioner granted one effective opportunity to conclude evidence subject to payment of costs Rs. 5,000.
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.
C.R. No.5005 of 2016 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.R. No.5005 of 2016
Date of Decision.08.08.2016
Dhanwant Singh
.......Petitioner
Vs.
Gurmit Singh and others ........Respondents
Present: Mr. D.S. Gurna, Advocate for the petitioner.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL)
The petitioner-plaintiff is aggrieved of the order dated 13.07.2016, whereby, evidence of the petitioner is closed.
Mr. D.S. Gurna, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in case, one opportunity is granted, he will conclude the entire evidence.
I have heard the counsel for the petitioner-plaintiff and appraised the paper book and of the view that no doubt, the petitionerplaintiff was negligent in concluding the evidence. However, in order to advance justice and prevent miscarriage of justice, I deem it appropriate to grant one effective opportunity to the petitioner to conclude the evidence.
Keeping in view the aforementioned observations, the impugned order is set aside and the petitioner-plaintiff shall conclude the evidence in accordance with law subject to payment of costs of `5,000/- which shall be condition precedent. If the costs is not paid as directed, the order passed
PANKAJ KUMAR 2016.08.10 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
C.R. No.5005 of 2016 -2-
already by the court below shall stand restored.
The impugned order is set aside and the revision petition
is allowed.
(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE August 08, 2016 Pankaj* Whether reasoned/speaking Yes Whether reportable No
PANKAJ KUMAR 2016.08.10 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to conclude evidence despite negligence.
Dhanwant Singh
Gurmit Singh and others
Amit Rawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
