Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.1670 of 2013 Date of Decision : March 13, 2013 Nawal Singh .....Petitioner VERSUS Ajit Singh and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN Present : Mr.R.K.Sharma, Advocate for the petitioiner.
T.P.S.MANN, J.
(Oral) The defendant has filed the present revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for challenging the order passed by the trial Court on 28.8.2012 whereby his evidence was closed by order.
He has also challenged the order dated 23.2.2013 passed by the trial Court dismissing his application for leading additional evidence.
While closing the evidence of the petitioner, the trial Court observed that on that date, one DW Suraj Bhan was present and examined.
No other DW was present.
An adjournment was sought by the defendant, which was strongly opposed.
Keeping in view the fact that the plaintiff had closed his evidence on 5.8.2011 and, thereafter, the petitioner had availed eight effective opportunities, including three last opportunities, but despite the same, he had not examined his entire evidence, the trial Court was left with no other option but to close his evidence.
His application for additional Civil Revision No.1670 of 2013 -2- evidence was dismissed on the ground that he had not challenged the aforementioned order dated 28.8.2012 by filing a revision petition.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that only the petitioner is left to be examined as a witness.
On 28.8.2012, the petitioner was very much present in the Court and had got prepared his affidavit and got it attested from the Oath Commissioner.
However, due to inadvertence and misunderstanding, the petitioner could not appear before the trial Court and tender his affidavit in examination-in-chief.
Prayer has been made for grant of one more opportunity to the petitioner to appear as his own witness before the trial Court.
Without considering the merits of the stand taken by the petitioner but keeping in view the interest of justice, this Court is of the considered view that one more opportunity is required to be granted to the petitioner to examine him as his own witness.
Resultantly, the revision is disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner to step into the witness box as his own witness, subject to costs of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to the plaintiffs.
( T.P.S.MANN ) March 13, 2013 JUDGE satish