In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 1038 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 14.2.2011 M/s Bhullar Trading Company ......petitioner Versus Raghbir Singh .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.H.S.Saggu, Advocate for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. Plaintiff-respondent had filed a suit for rendition of accounts. Plaintiff examined handwriting expert as PW-3 on 28.4.2010. The said witness was present for cross-examination but the counsel for the defendant did not examine the witness despite opportunity. Thereafter, an application was filed by the petitioner- defendant for recalling PW-3 for cross-examination. Vide order dated 25.1.2011, the trial Court dismissed the said application. Hence, the present petition has been filed by the defendant under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the present petition deserves dismissal. Civil Revision No. 1038 of 2011 (O&M) -2- Plaintiff has examined R.V Vashishta, handwriting and finger print expert, as PW-3. The said witness tendered his affidavit along with his report and other documents on 16.3.2010. Cross- examination of the said witness was deferred at the request of the counsel for the defendant. Thereafter, on 28.4.2010, the witness was present but the counsel for the defendant-petitioner did not cross-examine the witness despite opportunity and consequently, the cross-examination of PW-3 was treated as Nil. In these circumstances, since the counsel for the defendant had failed to cross-examine the witness despite opportunity, the application moved by the petitioner under Order 18 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recalling PW-3 was liable to be dismissed. Hence, the impugned order does not call for any interference by this Court. Dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE February 14, 2011 anita