Civil Revision No.4045 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.4045 of 2010 Date of decision : 01-07-2010 Balbir Singh .... Petitioner VERSUS Prem Kauldhar and another ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. H.S. Batth, Advocate, for the petitioner. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (Oral) Aggrieved against the dismissal of the suit plaintiff- petitioner filed an appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, an application under Order 23 Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC was filed with a prayer that the plaintiff be permitted to withdraw the suit on account of formal defect and liberty be granted to file a fresh one on the same cause of action. That application has been dismissed by the Appellate Court vide order dated 29.05.2010. Hence the present revision petition. While dismissing the application, the Appellate Court below held that in the suit filed it was pleaded that the partnership between the plaintiff and defendant was oral. Therefore, having failed to prove the same, plaintiff lost the suit. It was further noticed that earlier appeal was also dismissed and against the same the second appeal was filed in this Court and the matter was remanded back to the Lower Appellate Court as the applicatioin for additional evidence was not disposed of by the Appellate Court. The Court held that the suit Civil Revision No.4045 of 2010 -2- was filed on 09.11.1994 and issues were framed on 2.01.1995. Petitioner closed his evidence in the suit on 11.10.1999 and the suit was dismissed on 15.11.2002. The appeal filed was dismissed on 29.04.2005 and the matter was remanded back by the High Court to the Appellate Court on 15.05.2008. The Court held that it is too late in the day to urge that instead of an oral partnership, a written partnership deed existed between the parties. Court further held that petitioner cannot be permitted to have another round of litigation especially when the defect could have been cured by amending the plaint at the relevant time. No fault can be found with the reasoning given by the Court below. Hence no interference is warranted in the present revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed. (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) 01-07-2010 JUDGE manju