Dalbir Singh vs Ram Niwas
2023 Latest Caselaw 15107 P&H

                                                                                 2023:PHHC:117200

                                                C. R. No. 5137 of 2023                           -1-



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

                                                                                          Sr. No.131

                                                            Case No. : C. R. No. 5137 of 2023
                                                            Date of Decision : September 05, 2023

                               Dalbir Singh                               ....    Petitioner
                                                      vs.
                               Ram Niwas                                  ....    Respondent

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURBIR SINGH.

                                            *     *   *
           Present :           Mr. Kuldeep Sheoran, Advocate
                               for the petitioner.

                                            *     *   *
           GURBIR SINGH, J. :

1. Challenge in this revision petition filed under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India is to the order dated 23.08.203(Annexure P-3), passed

by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhiwani (for brevity - Trial

Court), whereby evidence of the petitioner (defendant before the learned

Trial Court) has been closed by court order.

2. The brief facts, as culled out from the paper book, are that the

respondent (plaintiff before the learned Trial Court) filed a suit for recovery.

The petitioner appeared in the suit on 07.09.2017 and moved an application

for leave to defend. On 22.12.2017, the said application was allowed and

case was adjourned to 23.01.2018. On 23.01.2018, an application for

issuing direction to the petitioner for furnishing Security/Bank Guarantee/

Deposit was moved by the respondent, which was decided on 19.07.2018. MONIKA 2023.09.06 17:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2023:PHHC:117200

On 16.08.2018, written statement was filed by the petitioner and issues were

also framed on the said date. Thereafter, respondent led the evidence and

closed the same on 04.11.2022. Then the case was adjourned for evidence

of the petitioner. The petitioner-defendant was partly examined on

31.05.2023 and his cross-examination was deferred. Thereafter, on 3-4

dates, no defence witness was present. Therefore, on 23.08.2023, since

several opportunities had already been given to the petitioner for recording

evidence and he had failed to conclude the same, the learned Trial Court,

vide impugned order, closed evidence of the petitioner by court order.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that ten effective

opportunities were granted to the respondent and he took 02 years and 02

months for producing his evidence, apart from the fact that only one witness

was examined. He has further prayed that only one opportunity be granted

to the petitioner as he wants to examine only one witness of alleged pronote.

The same could not be examined on 23.08.2023 because of the fact that the

counsel had noted down the wrong date of hearing. He has relied upon the

photocopies of brief and case diary maintained by learned counsel, on which

the dates are written by counsel. The same have been annexed with the

present petition as Annexures P-4 and P-5 respectively. Learned counsel for

the petitioner further undertakes not to take any more adjournments before

the learned Trial Court.

4. I have heard the submissions made by learned counsel for the

petitioner and also perused the case file.

MONIKA 5. Although there is some inaction on the part of the petitioner, but 2023.09.06 17:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2023:PHHC:117200

the Courts are required to do complete justice to the parties. Procedure is

hand-maid to the administration of justice and is meant for advancement of

justice. If one opportunity is granted to the petitioner to examine his

witness, then no prejudice would be caused to the other party since it shall

get an opportunity to cross-examine the said witness, which would help to

bring true picture on the file. The other party can also be compensated with

costs.

6. In order to avoid financial burden on the respondent and further

to avoid unnecessary delay in disposal of the case, service to respondent is

dispensed with.

7. In view of the aforesaid, the present revision petition is allowed

and the impugned order dated 23.08.203(Annexure P-3), passed by learned

Trial Court, whereby evidence of the petitioner has been closed by court

order, is set aside and the learned Trial Court is directed to grant only one

opportunity to the petitioner to produce his witness at his own responsibility

and tender documents, if any, subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as costs, to

be paid by the petitioner to the respondent, on the date to be fixed by the

learned Trial Court. The cross-examination of the witness produced by the

petitioner shall also be conducted on the same day. However, if for any

reason, the learned Trial Court is unable to record the cross-examination on

that day, it shall positively be recorded on the next working day. It is further

directed that no further adjournment shall be granted to the petitioner for

evidence.

MONIKA 8. The revision petition stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. 2023.09.06 17:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2023:PHHC:117200

9. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of along with

this judgment.

           September 05, 2023                                    (GURBIR SINGH)
           monika                                                    JUDGE

                               Whether speaking/reasoned ?       Yes/No.
                               Whether reportable ?              Yes/No.




MONIKA
2023.09.06 17:43
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document