C.R. No. 6638 of 2006 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 6638 of 2006 Date of Decision: December 8, 2009 Aryaveer Build Con. Pvt. Ltd. …..Petitioner Vs. Manohar Lal and another …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Rajinder Goyal, Advocate for respondents No.8 to 10. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) The plaintiff- petitioner has stepped into the shoes of original plaintiff under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC. Vide impugned order, an application for summoning the witnesses to prove the sale deed dated March 28, 2006 has been dismissed. C.R. No. 6638 of 2006 [2] Counsel for the petitioner submits that there are certain witnesses who had been summoned by the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner and that diet money and process fee to summon have already been submitted. Declining permission to examine the said witnesses would prejudice the rights of the petitioner. A direction is given that the witnesses who had been summoned prior to the stepping in of the petitioner would be permitted to be examined, if they have not been permitted to be examined by the Court. I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order refusing to permit the petitioner to produce the witnesses to prove the sale deed in favour of the petitioner. With the above modification, this revision petition is partly allowed. December 8, 2009 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE