Allowed

Manjit Kaur and Another v. Saroop Singh and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Aug 2024CR/1451/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged closure of their defence evidence by the Civil Judge after summoned witnesses failed to appear. The High Court held the order unjustified, since service of summons was the court's duty, set aside the impugned order and granted two effective opportunities to conclude evidence with rebuttal for respondents.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order closing evidence set aside; two effective opportunities granted to conclude remaining evidence; rebuttal opportunity preserved for respondents.

Manjit Kaur and Another Vs Saroop… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

116 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CR-1451-2019 Date of Decision: August 07, 2024

¶3

Manjit Kaur and another …Pe00oners

¶4

Versus

¶5

Saroop Singh and another …Respondents

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA

¶7

Present: - Mr. Harchand Singh Ba�h, Advocate for the pe��oners.

¶8

Ms. Prateek Mahajan and Ms. Saloni Sharma, Advocates for respondent No.1.

¶9

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶10

Pe��oners are aggrieved by the order dated 14.02.2019 (Annexure P-7) passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Pa2, whereby their evidence has been closed by the Court orders.

¶11

The impugned order reads as under:-

¶12

“Present : Sh. P.P. Dewan, Adv, counsel for the plain�ff

¶13

Sh. Dilsher Singh, Adv. counsel for the defendant No.1A and 1B. Sh. K.S. Ba%h, Adv. counsel for the defendant No.2 and 3 Defendant No.IC exparte vide order dated 17.12.2018.

¶14

DW1 Manjit Kaur, DW2 Resham Singh and DW3 Yograj Sethi present and cross-examined completely. No other DW is present inspite of availing two opportuni�es given by the Ld. District & Sessions Court of Ms. Harpreet Kaur Randhawa vide order dated 16.11.2018. Summons were also issued on the request of defendant No.2 and 3 to the witnesses but they failed to procure the presence of remaining witnesses. No further opportuni�es is available to the defendant as per order dated 16.11.2018. Hence, the defendant is hereby closed by order. Now case stands adjourned to 25.2.2019 for rebu%al evidence of the plain�ff. It is made clear that only two opportuni�es shall be given to the plain�ff for rebu%al evidence as per order dated 16.11.2018. ”

¶15

Learned counsel for the pe��oners has drawn a�en�on towards the fact that apart from the examining three witnesses on the date fixed, i.e. 14.02.2019, summons were also issued at the request of the pe��oners to other witnesses, but by observing that pe��oners had failed to procure the presence of the witnesses, the evidence was closed.

¶16

Sarita Rani 2024.08.07 05:16 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order

¶17

CR-1451-2019

¶18

2024:PHHC:101142

¶19

The impugned order is absolutely not jus�fied. Once, the summons had been issued to the witnesses, it was the duty of the Court to serve them as per law and then proceed further in accordance with law.

¶20

The trial Court could not have been swayed by the fact that only two opportuni�es had been provided by the Appellate Court to conclude the evidence as the trial Court had not directed that the pe��oners to produce evidence at own responsibility.

¶21

As such, the pe��on is allowed. The impugned order is hereby set aside. The trial Court is directed to provide two effec�ve opportuni�es to the pe��oners to conclude the remaining evidence. Necessary summons shall be sent. Das� summons shall be taken by the pe��oners to serve upon the witnesses. It is made clear for removal of doubts that respondents will be granted opportunity to lead evidence in rebu�al.

¶22

August 07, 2024		(DEEPAK GUPTA)
sarita		JUDGE
	Whether reasoned/speaking:	Yes/No
	Whether reportable:	Yes/No

¶23

Sarita Rani 2024.08.07 05:16 I attest to the accuracy of this document/order

Manjit Kaur and Another v. Saroop Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjit Kaur and Another v. Saroop Singh 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

Gulshan Kumar Vs M.C. Sonepat

Vikash Singh Alias Vikas Vs State of Haryana

Laxman Dass Vs Nagar Palika, Narnaul etc.

Pal Singh Vs Gurbachan Singh Mehat and Ors.

Joginder Singh Jogi Vs Punjab Wakf Board, Ambala Cantt

(O&M) Geeta Devi & Anr. Vs Sham Lal and Anr.