IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 1928 of 2010 Date of Decision : August 04, 2010. Gurdwara Committee Singh Sabha ...... Petitioner Versus. Rajinder Kaur and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER. Present:- Mr. V.K. Sandhir, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Rikhi, Advocate, for respondents. MAHESH GROVER, J. (ORAL). The petitioner is aggrieved by Order dated 23.02.2010 (Annexure-P-3), vide which his prayer for leading additional evidence had been declined. The petitioner in his application pleaded as follow :- “7. That S. Gurcharan Singh DW-1 has also filed a criminal complaint against certain office bearers of the Singh Sabha Gurdawara titled as Gurcharan Singh vs. Rajinder Singh and others under sections 420/467/468/471/470/120-B IPC which is still pending adjudication. In the said criminal complaint Gurcharan Singh DW-1 was cross examined by the counsel of the plaintiff wherein he has clearly admitted that he has got no concern whatsoever with the affairs of the Gurdawara. Similarly, S. Gurcharan Singh DW-1 has also stated in his written statement that he has got stay order against certain officials of the Singh Sabha Gurdawara. Infact, the said stay order has already been got vacated by the ld. Court of Smt. Sunita Kumari, Addl. District Judge, Amritsar, on dated 19.11.2009. 8. That all these documents are very much necessary to be placed on record for adjudicating upon the real controversy between the parties.” C.R. No. 1928 of 2010. -2- He, thus, prayed that the aforesaid documents are necessary for the proper adjudication of the matter and are required to be brought on record by way of additional evidence. The learned trial Court proceeded on the assumption that respondents have been cross-examined at length by the petitioner on an earlier occasion on 18.02.2008 and consequently could not allowed to be cross-examined again, but it partially allowed the prayer of the petitioner to adduce evidence in the shape of a document, which he wanted to adduce, while declining to permit him to bring on record the other document. Counsel for respondents has justified the Order, while counsel for the petitioner has highlighted his grievance. After hearing counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that no serious prejudice is likely to be caused to the respondents, if the documents, which have been referred to in para-7 of the application, extracted above, are permitted to be brought on record by way of additional evidence. It is settled proposition of law that such evidence, as is necessary for the proper adjudication of the matter, can be permitted to be brought on record by the Court. Having regard to the aforesaid, the revision petition is accepted and the petitioner is granted permission to produce on record, by way of evidence, the documents which have been referred to in para-7 of the application, extracted above. The impugned order shall be set aside subject to payment of Rs. 5,000/- as costs. The petitioner shall, however, no right to cross-examine the respondents. (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE August 04, 2010. sjks.