IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 10.11.2010 C.R.No.7308 of 2010 (O&M) Kuldeep Singh ...Petitioner Versus Hem Raj and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present : Mr. Sandeep Ghangas, Advocate, for Mr. Sukhdeep Parmar, Advocate, for the petitioner. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral) Challenge in the present revision petition is to an order passed by the learned trial Court on 21.10.2010, whereby an application filed by the defendant to summon the record of companies namely M/s Vippy Chetan Finance Company and M/s Vippy Finance and Hire Purchase Limited, from the plaintiffs, was dismissed. The learned trial Court has found that the plaintiffs have filed a suit for recovery in their individual capacity and therefore, the summoning of record of the Companies is not related to the controversy raised in the suit. It was also found that the defendant is moving applications time and again with a sole objective to delay the final decision of the suit. The petitioner has sought the records of two companies from the plaintiffs, who have filed the suit for specific performance in their individual capacity. It is open to the defendant to produce such evidence, as the defendant may consider appropriate, but to summon the record of juristic entity from the plaintiffs, who have filed suit in their individual C.R.No.7308 of 2010 (O&M) capacity, cannot be said to be tenable. The learned trial Court has rightly declined such application. I do not find any patent illegality or irregularity in the order passed by the learned trial Court, which may warrant any interference by this Court in its revisional jurisdiction. Dismissed. 10.11.2010 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE 2