Harpreet And Another v. Inder Singh And Another

C.R. No.6652 of 2016 -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.6652 of 2016 Date of Decision.03.10.2016 Harpreet and another .......Petitioners Vs.

Inder Singh and another ........Respondents

Present:

Mr. Ajay Pal Singh Rehan, Advocate for the petitioners.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL 1.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

2.

To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? -.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) The petitioner-plaintiff is aggrieved of the order dated 17.08.2016, whereby, his documentary evidence has been closed. Mr. Ajay Pal Singh Rehan, Advocate for the petitioner submits that the issues have been framed and in case, one opportunity is granted, he will place on record the documentary 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 placing on record the documentary 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 place on record one documentary evidence.

Keeping in view the aforementioned observations, the impugned order is set aside and the petitioner-plaintiff shall place on record one documentary evidence in accordance with law subject to payment of costs of PANKAJ KUMAR 2016.10.06 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

C.R. No.6652 of 2016 -2- `5,000/- which shall be condition precedent. If the costs is not paid as directed, the order passed already by the court below shall stand restored. The impugned order is set aside and the revision petition is allowed.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE October 03, 2016 Pankaj* Whether reasoned/speaking Yes Whether reportable No PANKAJ KUMAR 2016.10.06 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document