Surinder Kumar And Another v. Piara Singh And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND

HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.7799 of 2016 Date of Decision.18.11.2016 Surinder Kumar and another .......Petitioners Vs Piara Singh and others ........Respondents

Present:

Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL -.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) Mr. Shiv Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that despite depositing of diet money and report on the summons (Annexure P-2), evidence of the plaintiff has been closed. The Court should have taken remedy to the provisions of Order 16 Rule 12 CPC. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, appraised the paper book and of the view that once the petitioner has taken steps to summon the witness, the remedy is not to close the evidence but to take appropriate steps in accordance with law, as noticed above. The impugned order is set aside. The trial Court is directed to take steps to effect service upon the witness as evident from Annexures P-2 and P-3. The revision petition is allowed on aforementioned terms. (AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE November 18, 2016 Pankaj* Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No PANKAJ KUMAR 2016.11.22 11:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document