CR No. 2690 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 2690 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.5.2009 Darshwinder Singh .. Petitioner v. Manmohan Singh and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. K. S. Boparai, Advocate for the petitioner. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order passed by the learned court below, where the cross-examination of DW-1 and DW-2 produced by the respondent-defendant in evidence was treated as nil as the petitioner-plaintiff failed to cross-examine them. Much facts are not required to be noticed, as it would be suffice to mention that in a suit for possession filed by the petitioner and respondent No. 2- plaintiffs, statements of DW-1 and DW-2 were recorded on 11.2.2009 and the case was adjourned for their cross-examination by the plaintiffs on 27.3.2009. It was further adjourned to 9.4.2009. However, the petitioner-plaintiff having failed to cross-examine DW-1 and DW-2 even on two dates, their cross-examination was ordered to be treated as nil. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no doubt there is some lapse on his part, but still the same should not be a hindrance for complete justice to the parties, as on account of small lapse, respondent No. 1-defendant and the witnesses could very well be compensated with costs, as the petitioner only seeks one opportunity to cross-examine DW-1 and DW-2, as in the absence thereof, the petitioner will suffer great prejudice. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, as a matter of indulgence, this Court is of the opinion that it would be in the interest of justice in case one more opportunity is granted to the petitioner for cross-examining DW-1 and DW-2 on a date to be fixed by the learned court below for the purpose. The same shall be subject to payment of Rs. 2,500/- each as costs to DW-1 and DW-2 respectively. CR No. 2690 of 2009 [2] The revision petition is disposed of in the manner indicated above with liberty to the opposite party to move this court in case he is aggrieved against the order passed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 12.5.2009 mk