Punjab-Haryana High Court
Siraj Din vs Mohd. Khalil on 1 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
122 CR No.1648 of 2022
Date of Decision : 01.12.2022
Siraj Din ....Petitioner
VERSUS
Mohd. Khalil ....Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
Present : Mr. Ajit Kumar Sharma, Advocate for
Mr. Imran Farooqi, Advocate for the petitioner.
ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)
The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of
the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 04.04.2022 whereby
the application filed by the petitioner for re-calling the witness, namely,
Mohd. Khalil (plaintiff-respondent herein) has been dismissed.
The brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the plaintiff-
respondent filed a suit for recovery of Rs.84,050/- against the defendant-
petitioner. It is the case set up by the defendant-petitioner that he was never
served any notice or summon and an ex parte judgment and decree dated
25.03.2013 came to be passed against the defendant-petitioner. On learning
about passing of the ex parte judgment and decree, an application under
Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 CPC was filed for setting aside the
ex parte judgment and decree dated 25.03.2013. In the proceedings under
Order IX Rule 13 CPC, the plaintiff-respondent was examined-in-chief on
18.11.2021 and on the same date he tendered documents Ex.R-10 to Ex.R-
18. On 18.11.2021, the cross-examination of RW-1 Mohd. Khalil, was
deferred on the request of counsel for the defendant-petitioner. On
14.12.2021, RW-1 Mohd. Khalil, was completely cross-examined by
JITENDER KUMAR
2022.12.02 10:25
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
Chandigarh
counsel for the defendant-petitioner and thereafter, the plaintiff-respondent
closed his oral evidence on the same date. Thereafter, an application was
filed under Section 151 CPC on 04.04.2022 for recall of the witness, Mohd.
Khalil, on the ground that the counsel did not cross-examine the witness on
documents mentioned in examination-in-chief as Ex.R-10 to Ex.R-18. The
said application was dismissed vide the impugned order dated 04.04.2022.
Learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner would contend
that earlier counsel did not cross-examine the witness qua the documents
Ex.R-10 to Ex.R-18 and, hence, it was necessary to recall the witness for
further cross-examination.
Heard.
In the present case the witness, RW-1 Mohd. Khalil, was
examined in chief on 18.11.2021. On the said date his cross-examination
was deferred on the request of counsel for the defendant-petitioner.
Thereafter, on 14.12.2021, the said witness was completely cross-examined
and the oral evidence was closed by the plaintiff-respondent. Having availed
his opportunity to cross-examine the witness, an application was thereafter
filed for recalling the said witness. Learned counsel for the defendant-
petitioner is unable to show as to under what provision of law the said
witness could have been re-called for further cross-examination when he
was completely cross-examined by counsel for the defendant-petitioner. The
defendant-petitioner cannot be permitted to recall the witness for filling in
the lacuna in his evidence. The application filed by the defendant-petitioner
is nothing but a total misuse and abuse of process of law.
JITENDER KUMAR
2022.12.02 10:25
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
Chandigarh
In view of the above, I do not find any illegality and infirmity
in the impugned order. The present revision petition, which is wholly devoid
of any merits, is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also
stand disposed off.
( ALKA SARIN )
01.12.2022 JUDGE
jk
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: YES/NO
JITENDER KUMAR
2022.12.02 10:25
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this order/judgment.
Chandigarh
