IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 378 of 2010. Date of decision: 07.12.2010. Himanshu Sharma …Petitioner. Versus Kishori Lal & Others. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. Lalit K. Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Bhupinder Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate. Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) This petition is directed against the order dated 6.10.2010 whereby the learned Trial Court has declined to give further opportunity to the petitioner to produce and cross- examine the local commissioner. 2. There is no manner of doubt that the petitioner has been granted ample opportunity to cross-examine the local commissioner. However, Mr. Lalit K. Sharma states that in between the local commissioner was transferred and thereafter had retired and therefore the petitioner could not serve or 1 Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. examine him. Without entering into any unnecessary controversy in the matter, I feel that one opportunity should be given to the petitioner to produce and cross-examine the local commissioner. The parties through their learned counsel are directed to appear before the learned Trial Court on 3.1.2011. The learned Trial Court shall fix the case for recording the evidence of the local commissioner in the month of February, 2011. The petitioner shall take dasti summons for the service of the local commissioner and it shall be his duty to serve the local commissioner. In case the local commissioner does not appear despite service of summons, then the court can take coercive steps to ensure his presence. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs. (Deepak Gupta) Judge December, 7, 2010 (guleria)