Civil Revision No.2801 of 2010 1 .. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.2801 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision : 29.04.2010 Amrinder Singh ...... Petitioner Versus Arpana Sharma ....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present:- Mr. M.S.Jandiala, Advocate, for the petitioner. NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL) This plaintiff's revision is directed against the order dated March 3rd, 2010 (Annexure P/1), passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh, whereby the evidence of the petitioner-plaintiff was closed. 2. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that affidavits of the petitioner and his witness – Krishan Lal were filed by way of evidence on February 11th, 2009, but they were not cross- examined and the case was adjourned on the request of counsel for the respondent. Thereafter, number of adjournments were taken by learned counsel for the defendant to cross-examine the plaintiff and his witness, on one pretext or the other. It has been prayed that one opportunity be accorded for cross-examination of the petitioner and his witness, and that too, on the date fixed. 3. A perusal of the impugned order, Annexure P/1, would therefore, go to show that evidence of the plaintiff was closed only on the ground that number of opportunities were granted to the petitioner to lead his entire evidence, but he did not. 4. Rules of procedure are mere hand-maids of justice. Civil Revision No.2801 of 2010 2 .. Procedure is meant to secure justice and not to impede it. Since the affidavits of the petitioner and his witness have already been tendered and they have only to be cross-examined, grant of one one opportunity for their cross-examination shall be in the interest of justice. 4. Hence, the petition is accepted. Order under challenge is set-aside. The petitioner is accorded one opportunity to produce himself and his witness for being cross-examined by the other side, of course, on his own responsibility. (Nawab Singh) Judge 29.4.2010 som