Ram Singh v. Satpal Singh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CR-3695-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision : 25.08.2025 Ram Singh ... Petitioner(s)

Versus

Satpal Singh ... Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present :

Mr. Munish Garg, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondent.

ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral) 1.

None has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent despite service. Accordingly, he is proceeded against ex parte. 2.

The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned order dated 05.04.2023 whereby the application filed by the defendant-petitioner for issuance of directions to the plaintiff-respondent to produce the photocopy of his passport has been dismissed.

3.

Learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner would contend that the present application has been filed for seeking directions to the plaintiffrespondent to produce the photocopy of his passport, however, the same has been disposed off without compelling the plaintiff-respondent to produce the said document.

4.

I have heard the learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner. 5.

In the present case the plaintiff-respondent had denied being in Yogesh Sharma 2025.08.26 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgment/order.

Chandigarh

CR-3695-2023 (O&M) possession of his passport stating that the same was with the private company in Dubai where he was working and that he would not be given his passport till such time the contract is over. The Trial Court vide the impugned order dated 05.04.2023 held that no direction can be given for production of the document as the plaintiff-respondent had stated that he was not in possession of the said document, therefore, the application was disposed off with a direction that in future the plaintiff-respondent would not be allowed to place the document on record without prior permission of the Court. It is trite that the Court cannot compel a plaintiff to produce the document. The interest of the defendant-petitioner has already been safeguarded by stating that the plaintiff-respondent would not be allowed to place the document on record without prior permission of the Court.

6.

In view of the above, no fault can be found with the impugned order dated 05.04.2023. The present revision petition being devoid of any merit is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.

7.

It is made clear that any observation made herein shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 25.08.2025 Yogesh Sharma ( ALKA SARIN ) JUDGE NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO Yogesh Sharma 2025.08.26 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgment/order.

Chandigarh