Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vinod Gupta vs Mehma Singh & Ors on 25 August, 2014
Author: Rajiv Narain Raina
Bench: Rajiv Narain Raina
CR No.4912 of 2014 (O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR No.4912 of 2014 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 25.08.2014
Vinod Gupta
..... Petitioner
Versus
Mehma Singh and others ..... Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA
Present: Mr. Rajendra Nath Datt, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J.(Oral)
CM No.17531-CII of 2014 CM is allowed as prayed for subject to just exceptions. CM No.17532-CII of 2014 CM is allowed as prayed for and document is taken on record. CR No.4912 of 2014 In this order the parties are referred to by their original positions in the suit. Plaintiff has brought this revision challenging the order dated May 01, 2014 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division) Mohali.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out to the order dated April 29, 2014 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division) Mohali which indicates that the next date of hearing was fixed for consideration on stay application. On May 01, 2014 the plaintiff's application for temporary MANJU 2014.08.27 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CR No.4912 of 2014 (O&M) -2- injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 was rejected. However, on the same day, the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Mohali framed issues instead of posting the matter for admission and denial of documents and for framing of issues.
Learned counsel complains that an important step in the proceedings has been omitted which has caused prejudice to him inasmuch as he has lost an opportunity to call the defendants to admit and deny documents, which procedure infact is intended to shorten the litigation so that the real issues arising from the pleadings can be struck conveniently. He submits that the issues framed by the Court also do not reflect truly the issues arising which in any case can only crystalize if the defendants are called upon to admit or deny documents and to answer interrogatories in case, they are filed, the opportunity for which has also been denied.
There is merit in what the plaintiff submits. The defendants cannot urge before this Court in case, they are issued summons to appear to resist the petition that the plaintiff cannot file application for admissions and denials and interrogatories which are permitted by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as a valuable step in the proceedings.
Therefore, this petition is allowed. The petitioner will file an application for admission and denial of documents and to serve interrogatories on the defendants on the next date fixed before the trial Court, i.e. September 15, 2014. The defendants may be called upon to file their replies within a reasonable time thereof after which the learned trial Court would consider the result of the exercise and strike issues accordingly. In case, the issues as already framed arise, they may be MANJU 2014.08.27 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CR No.4912 of 2014 (O&M) -3- retained. If any additional ones arise the trial court would address itself to them.
(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE 25.08.2014 manju MANJU 2014.08.27 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh