Kiran Verma And Another vs Vijender Gupta on 1 November, 2018

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Kiran Verma And Another vs Vijender Gupta on 1 November, 2018

Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur

1 HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 424 of 2018 .


                                              Date of decision: 1st November, 2018

           Kiran Verma and another                                              ...Petitioners





                                              Versus
           Vijender Gupta                          ...Respondent

__________________________________________________ Coram:

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge Whether approved for reporting1 :

For the Petitioners: Mr. Servedaman Rathore, Advocate For the Respondent: Mr. Sudhir Thakur, Advocate __________________________________________________ Vivek Singh Thakur. J. (Oral) Petitioners herein are defendants in the civil suit, pending in the trial Court, whereas respondent is the plaintiff.

They will be referred to in this judgment as per their status in the civil suit.

2. Present petition has been filed against the order, dated 17th August, 2018, passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P., whereby after 1 Whether Reporters of local newspaper are permitted to see the judgment ?

::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2018 22:57:59 :::HCHP 2

dismissing the application for adjournment filed on behalf of the defendants on account of non availability of their original .

counsel, right to cross examine the plaintiff's witnesses has been closed by the order of the Court.

3. It is submitted on behalf of the defendants that number of opportunities were taken by the plaintiff for leading his evidence, including filing the affidavits of four witnesses and it was not on account of defendants' conduct, but for the adjournments sought by the plaintiff, the suit was adjourned for plaintiff's evidence.

4. On the contrary, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff has canvassed that on 06.11.2017 and 01.03.2018, witnesses were available for cross examination after filing of their affidavits, however, time was sought by defendants for their cross examination and whereafter witnesses could be summoned with great difficulty with the assistance of the Court on 17.08.2018, the date fixed for cross examining those witnesses, but in the morning session, matter was passed over on the request of defendants that their ogiginal counsel will be ::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2018 22:57:59 :::HCHP 3 available during the post lunch session and on that day cost of Rs. 500/- was also paid by the plaintiff to the defendants.

However, during post lunch session, an application for adjournment referring the the ailment of the original counsel therein, was preferred on behalf of the defendants which has rightly been dismissed by the trial Court.

5. Perusal of copy of order sheet, placed on record, indicates that PWs were not present on 25.04.2017, 05.07.2017, 04.01.2018, 17.05.2018 and 09.08.2018 and time was sought by the plaintiff to produce evidence and it is also fact that on 06.11.2017 and 01.03.2018 and also on 17.08.2018, time was sought on behalf of the defendants for cross examining the witnesses.

6. Keeping in view the conduct of both the parties, it would be in the interest of justice to grant one, but last opportunity to the defendants to cross examine the plaintiff's witnesses on a date to be fixed by the trial Court on 12 th November, 2018, on which date case has already been fixed for leading the defendants' evidence. It is made clear that on ::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2018 22:57:59 :::HCHP 4 that date, defendants shall not be insisted for leading their evidence and also defendants, if required, shall be provided .

Court assistance for summoning plaintiff's witnesses and entire cost for which, including the expenses payable to the witnesses, shall be borne by the defendants. An additional cost of Rs. 500/- shall also be paid by the defendants to the plaintiff on the next date of hearing, fixed before the trial Court. It is also made clear that no adjournment shall be granted to the defendants to cross examine the plaintiff's witnesses after procuring the presence of that witness in the Court and defendants shall take complete effective steps for summoning the plaintiff's witness within the time granted by the trial Court.

7. Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Copy dasti.

1st November, 2018(K) ( Vivek Singh Thakur ), Judge ::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2018 22:57:59 :::HCHP

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court