IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 7263 of 2010 Date of Decision: November 09, 2010 Raghbir Singh …Petitioner Versus Ram Niwas and others. … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be Allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Ajit Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Plaintiff-petitioner has invoked supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the order dated 28.09.2010 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jhajjar, thereby rejecting the application of the plaintiff – petitioner calling the defendants to cross-examine PW6-plaintiff. The brief facts of the present case are that after framing of the issues, plaintiff has produced affidavit of all the witnesses. After the cross-examination of PW5, plaintiff himself has closed his evidence and did not opt to produce PW6 for cross-examination. Thereafter, defendants have C.R.No. 7263 of 2010 produced entire evidence and learned Trial Court has granted opportunity to the plaintiff to produce evidence in rebuttal. After seeking so many adjournments, plaintiff has moved application under Section 151 C.P.C. stating therein that although affidavit of PW6 was filed along with the affidavits of other PWs, however, PW6 was not produced for cross- examination and now defendants be called to cross-examine PW6. Learned Trial Court has rejected the application vide impugned order observing therein that after the evidence of the defendants, plaintiff cannot be permitted to ask the defendants to cross-examine PW6 on the basis of affidavit filed earlier, since plaintiff himself has closed the evidence and did not opt to produce PW6 for cross-examination when plaintiff’s evidence was on. I do not find any illegality or jurisdiction error in the impugned order. If a party do not produce all the witnesses before the Court for cross-examination after filing affidavit in examination-in-chief and closes evidence, then after the evidence of the other party, the first party cannot be permitted to say that remaining witnesses of that party be cross- examined after the closure of the evidence of the other party. Dismissed. November 09, 2010 (Alok Singh) vkd Judge 2