Shiv Kumar v. Ashok Nagpal & ORS

CR-4332-2016 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CR-4332-2016 Date of Decision:- 24.07.2017 Shiv Kumar .....Petitioner

Versus

Ashok Nagpal and others .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI

Present:

Mr. Narender Pal Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. P.S. Chauhan, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 & 3.

**** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside of impugned order dated 12.05.2016 (Annexure P-11), passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Karnal whereby the evidence of the petitioner in his application dated 07.10.2014 under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 CPC (Annexure P-2) has been closed by observing that he had availed 10 effective opportunities to lead the evidence.

Perusal of zimini orders (Annexures P-5, P-7 to P-9) shows that during the pendency of application under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 CPC, examination-in-chief of the petitioner was recorded on Naresh Kumar 2017.08.04 09:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CR-4332-2016 -223.09.2015 and thereafter it was adjourned for cross-examination and consequently application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC for seeking amendment in the said application was filed and the same was allowed after getting the reply of the plaintiff on 02.12.2015. Thereafter, an amended application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC was filed by the present petitioner and all the dates taken were not for recording the evidence.

Heard.

Taking into consideration the nature of litigation and the explanation put-forth, the trial Court ought to have granted one opportunity to the defendant, to conclude his evidence, particularly when, no prejudice was going to be caused to plaintiff-respondent No.1 and he could well be compensated with adequate costs, in this relevant connection.

In the light of aforesaid reasons, the instant revision petition is allowed. Order dated 12.05.2016 (Annexure P-11), passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Karnal, is hereby set aside. The trial Court is directed to grant one effective opportunity to the petitioner-defendant to conclude his evidence. However, this would be subject to the payment of `5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) as costs, to be paid by the petitionerdefendant to plaintiff-respondent No.1. ( RITU BAHRI ) July 24, 2017 JUDGE naresh.k Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Naresh Kumar 2017.08.04 09:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh