Malkiat Singh vs Ranjit Singh on 22 January, 2014

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Malkiat Singh vs Ranjit Singh on 22 January, 2014

Bench: Rajiv Narain Raina

           CR No.475 of 2014
                                                                                           :1:

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
                                     CHANDIGARH


                                                              Civil Revision No.475 of 2014
                                                             Date of Decision : 22.01.2014

           Malkiat Singh
                                                                             ..... Petitioner(s)

                                                 Versus


           Ranjit Singh

                                                                           ..... Respondent(s)


           CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA

           Present:            Mr.Mohit Garg, Advocate,
                               for the petitioner(s).


                                           *****

           1.         To be referred to the Reporters or not?
           2.         Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

                                           *****

           RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J. (Oral)

This revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 14.1.2014 passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ludhiana whereby the application filed by the respondent-plaintiff under Order 14 Rule 5 read with Section 151 CPC for reframing issue No.6 has been allowed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has restricted his prayer by accepting that onus probandi deserves to have been placed on him with respect to issue No.6 and that the trial court order which restricts Kumar Paritosh 2014.01.24 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR No.475 of 2014 :2: opportunity to two effective dates deserves to be read as two effective opportunities to lead evidence from the date of appearance of the witness (es) in order to secure the ends of justice.

The witnesses required to be summoned are stated to be official witnesses and therefore learned counsel may not be unfair in his submission that securing the presence of such witnesses may be beyond the petitioner's control on a given date and therefore, interest of justice demands that order impugned deserves to the interfered with to the extent that the opportunities would run from the date of appearance.

I find merit in this submission and to this extent, the petition is allowed. The petitioner would now take the two effective opportunities of leading evidence from the date of appearance of the official witnesses and no further.

Ordered accordingly.

(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE January 22, 2014 Paritosh Kumar Kumar Paritosh 2014.01.24 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court