C.R. No. 7781 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 7781 of 2010 Date of Decision: 30.11.2010 UCO Bank .... Petitioner Versus Ved Parkash and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present : Mr. Sanjiv Gupta KKR, Advocate for the petitioner 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? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 28.9.2010 whereby cross-examination of PW-1, PW-3 and PW-4 was directed to be treated as nil and order dated 3.11.2010 whereby application for recalling the order dated 28.9.2010 was dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that on 28.9.2010 learned counsel for the petitioner-defendant appearing before the trial Court was busy in another Court, hence, Sh. Manmohan Singh, Junior Advocate has sought time from the trial Court on the ground that his Senior Sh. Sudesh Mahajan, Advocate is busy in another Court. However, time was not granted and impugned order dated 28.9.2010 was passed. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that on the date either fixed by this Court or by the learned Trial Court, cross examination of PW-1, PW-3 and C.R. No. 7781 of 2010 2 PW-4 shall be conducted and no further adjournment shall be sought. Learned Single Judge of this Court in the matter of Prem Lata Vs. Ram Sarup reported in 2005(4) RCR (Civil) 423 placing reliance on judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Batala Machine Tools Workshop Coop. vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurdaspur has held that matter can be disposed of at the stage of admission without any notice to the opposite party, because if the respondent is summoned to contest this litigation, it may involve huge expenditure and unnecessary harassment and delay of the proceedings. In the opinion of this Court, present matter can be disposed of at the admission stage without any notice to the respondent. This Court is of the further opinion that issuing notice to the respondent shall cause unnecessary delay in the disposal of the matter, hence, this Court proposes to decide this petition without notice to the respondent. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in mind, the golden rule that none should be given walk over and lis between the parties, as far as possible, should be decided at its own merit after affording sufficient opportunities to both the parties to place on record entire evidence and material, this Court direct that learned trial Court shall fix a date for the purpose of cross- examination of PWs. On the date so fixed, PW-1, PW-3 and PW-4 shall be produced on the expenses of the defendant/petitioner and petitioner shall cross examine all the PWs. If, for any reason, examination is not complete on the date so fixed, then learned Court C.R. No. 7781 of 2010 3 shall be at liberty to hold day-to-day trial or fix any future date, which is convenient to the Court. However, it is made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted to the petitioner. Petitioner shall pay cost of ` 5000/- to the respondents on or before the next date so fixed by the trial Court. If respondents feel aggrieved from this order, they shall be at liberty to move this Court for recalling of the order. Petition shall stand disposed of accordingly. (ALOK SINGH) 30.11.2010 JUDGE reena