IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 7601 of 2009 Date of Decision: February 05, 2010 Jagir Singh. …Petitioner Versus Ajaib Singh. …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present: Mr. Rajinder Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Rangi, Advocate and Mr. Jag Nahar Singh, Advocate, for the respondent. S.D. Anand, J. The respondent herein had examined a bank official who made a record-based statement with respect to the statement of account of M/s P.K. Trading Company. Though the petitioner herein did fully cross-examine that witness, it filed a plea thereafter for the recall of that witness along with the statement of account of M/s P.K. Trading Company, Samana. The averment, in the course of the application, was that the record produced by that witness earlier (and which contained only two entries) was incorrect and that the relevant record otherwise contained as many as 50 entries. C.R. No. 7601 of 2009 The learned Trial Court declined the plea by observing that “the plaintiff has not averred anything in the application about relevancy of account statement of M/s P.K. Trading.” The foundational premise of the impugned order is illogical. The impugned application categorically indicated, in the course of para no.3 thereof, that the relevant statement of account contained more than 50 entries. On the plea of relevancy, it may be noticed that if the statement made by the witness was relevant at the time the witness was examined by the respondent herein, it continues to be relevant for the purposes of the cross examination at the instance of the petitioner herein as well. The petition shall stand allowed. The impugned order dated 07.12.2009 shall stand set aside. The learned Trial Court shall order the recall of the concerned bank official for further cross-examination in the context of the application aforementioned. Disposed of accordingly. February 05, 2010 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 2