C.R.No.5195 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.5195 of 2009 Date of Decision : 10.09.2009 Vivek Sharma ...Petitioner Versus Davinder Nath Sharma ...Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. Rajesh Punj, Advocate, for the petitioner. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated 3.8.2009 passed by the learned trial Court, whereby remaining cross- examination by the petitioner of the plaintiff, was ordered to be deemed as closed. In an unfortunate dispute between father and son, the father has filed a suit for declaration that he is owner in possession of a house in Panchkula. In the said case, the father, who is more than 80 years of age, tendered his affidavit in his examination-in-chief on 17.3.2009. The cross-examination was deferred as the witness was not feeling well. On 3.8.2009, the plaintiff was cross-examined before lunch session for two hours. The case was ordered to be taken up after lunch. The witness was present in Court since 10 o'clock. However, after lunch the counsel for the defendant did not appear to continue with the cross-examination and at 3.55 PM the Court passed an order closing of further cross- examination of the plaintiff by the defendant. The conduct of proceedings shows that the defendant wants to C.R.No.5195 of 2009 2 tire out his father, who is 80 years of age and to harass him as he has not given up his claim. The conduct of proceedings is mala fide. The learned trial Court has rightly passed an order of closing further right of cross- examination by the defendant. In view of the above, I do not find any patent illegality or irregularity in the order passed by the learned trial Court, which may warrant interference by this Court in the present revision petition. Dismissed. 10.09.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE