Himachal Pradesh High Court
Surender Kumar vs Pankaj Bansal & Another on 3 May, 2023
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CMPMO No.177 of 2023
Decided on: 3rd May, 2023
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surender Kumar .....Petitioner
.
Versus
Pankaj Bansal & another .....Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.
Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Aditya Thakur, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Vipin Pandit, Advocate
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Vide impugned order dated 04.03.2023, learned Trial Court has closed the defence evidence. Feeling aggrieved, the defendant has instituted the present petition.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The defendant (petitioner) had filed list of witnesses on 10.01.2020. Eight witnesses were detailed therein including the defendant.
4. It is not in dispute that the defendant examined witness No.2 (Shivani Thakur) on 2.9.2022. The defendant was himself examined on 16.07.2022. Witness No.3 Sh.
Sanjay Kumar was given up on 16.07.2022. According to 1 Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order?
::: Downloaded on - 04/05/2023 20:38:14 :::CIS 2learned counsel for the defendant (petitioner), the defendant does not intend to examine witness No.7 (Manohar Lal) and this witness be treated as given up. This statement of learned counsel is taken note of. The only witnesses, left to .
be examined by the defendant are witness No.4 (Ishwar Lal Chaudhary), witness No.5 (Satish Kumar) and witness No.8 (Superintendent/concerned Clerk) from Board of School Education, Haryana at Bhiwani.
Insofar as witness No.6 Ms. Sarla Rani is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner states that said witness will be produced by the petitioner at his own responsibility as the witness is his maternal Aunt (Mausi).
The Zimni order placed on record by the learned counsel shows that witness No.8 remained present before the learned Trial Court on 24.11.2022, however, learned Presiding Officer was on leave on that day. The record prima facie shows that the defendant had taken steps for the service of witnesses No. 4, 5 and 8 several times, but these witnesses were never served. The fact remains that the statements of these witnesses are yet to be recorded.
5. There does not appear to be any laxity on part of the defendant in taking steps for serving the witnesses of the nature observed by the learned Trial Court in the ::: Downloaded on - 04/05/2023 20:38:14 :::CIS 3 impugned order. Taking holistic view of the matter, it will be expedient and in the interest of justice to grant one more opportunity to the defendant for production of his witnesses. The matter is now stated to be fixed before the .
learned Trial court on 16.5.2023. This petition is therefore disposed of by directing the defendant to take all requisite steps for summoning witness No.4 (Ishwar Lal Chaudhary), respondent No.5 (Satish Kumar) and respondent No.8 (Superintendent/concerned Clerk) within seven days from today. The learned Trial Court thereafter shall proceed in the matter in accordance with law. It is made clear that no unnecessary adjournments shall be granted to the defendant for producing his evidence.
Considering the fact that the civil suit was instituted in the year 2015, it is hoped and expected that the learned Trial Court shall expedite the disposal of the suit. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua
May 3rd, 2023 Judge
tarun
::: Downloaded on - 04/05/2023 20:38:14 :::CIS