IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No. 182 of 2007 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.10. 2008 Balwinder Kaur ......Appellant Versus Sarabjit Singh and another ...... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.Vishal Gupta, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.S.R.Choudhary, Advocate for the respondents. **** Ajay Tewari, J. This appeal has been filed challenging the dismissal of the suit filed by the appellant under Order 17 Rule 3 C.P.C. for the reason that the appellant failed to lead evidence despite having been granted various opportunities for the same. Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed this appeal urging that in view of the recalcitrant default on the part of the appellant the suit was rightly dismissed. In my opinion though the default of the plaintiff-appellant is clear yet the interest of justice would be served if the case is remanded back RSA No. 182 of 2007 -2- to the trial Court with the stipulation that the plaintiff-appellant would lead entire evidence at her own responsibility on one date to be fixed for this purpose by the learned trial Court without seeking the assistance of the Court for summoning any witness. Since the respondent has been dragged right up to the High Court, in my opinion he should be compensated for this. Let costs of Rs.20,000/- be paid by the appellant. The deposit of costs would be a precondition for leading evidence by the appellant. Appeal allowed. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE October 23, 2008 sunita