IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CR NO.1877/2009. Date of Decision:2.4.2009. Tej Kaur and others ..........Petitioners. Versus Balwinder Singh and others. ..........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present: Mr. R.S.Rangpuri,Advocate for the petitioners. JASWANT SINGH,J(Oral). Petitioners-defendants have filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for setting aside the order dated 16.12.2008 (Annexure P/1) passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Muktsar, whereby the application moved by them for adjourning the cross examination of 5 PWs, who were present on that date, was rejected and the cross examination of those 5 PWs was ordered to be considered as nil. Learned counsel for the petitioners-defendants submits that although three opportunities had been granted, however, on 16.12.2008 due to change of counsel, 5 PWs, who were present on that date could not be cross examined as their counsel namely Sh.Gurmeet Singh Brar,Advocate,who had been engaged on that date only, all of a sudden had to leave the Court premises in order to attend bhog ceremony of one of his close relations. It is submitted that in these circumstances, one last effective opportunity, be granted to the petitioners-defendants to cross examine the said PWs. Notice of the petition to the counsel for caveators-respondents. CR NO.1877/2009. -2- Mr.K.S.Sivia,Advocate, who is present in Court accepts notice and states that petitioners-defendants have been delaying the proceedings on one pretext or the other and that sufficient opportunities have already been granted to them. It is well settled that laws of procedure are meant to regulate effectively, attend and aid the object of doing substantial and real justice and not to foreclose an adjudication on merits for governing rights of citizens under various laws. Procedural laws must be liberally construed as they are handmaid of justice to advance the ends of justice and technical objections which tend to be stumbling blocks should be discouraged except where the mandate of law inevitably necessitates it. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, perusing the record and keeping in view the settled proposition of law in my considered opinion, the petitioners-defendants should not suffer due to predicament of their newly engaged counsel to cross examine the present PWs on the date fixed. Accordingly, I deem it just and expedient to grant one last opportunity to the petitioners to cross examine all the PWs on the next date of hearing or on a date to be fixed by the learned Trial Court, subject to payment of costs. For the reasons stated above, present revision petition is allowed, impugned order dated 16.12.2008 (Annexure P/1) is set aside and petitioners- defendants are granted one last opportunity to cross examine all the PWs, at their own responsibility, on the next date of hearing or on a date to be fixed by the learned Trial Court, subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- as costs, to be shared equally by all the respondents-plaintiffs. 2.4.2009. (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge