CR No.6440/2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.6440/2011 Date of decision: 20.10.2011. Raj Kumar Bansal and another ....................Petitioners v. Navneet Aggarwal and others .....................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr.Vishal Gupta,Advocate for the petitioners. Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral) Plaintiffs-petitioners have filed the instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution assailing the order dated 29.9.2011 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Ludhiana whereby the learned trial court has declared the cross examination of DW2 Ravi Kumar to be treated as “Nil”. It is apparent that the plaintiffs/petitioners had filed a suit for permanent injunction seeking to restrain the defendants from removing/ demolishing a pillar in between the shop of the petitioners and respondents. It is asserted in the plaint that the said demolition would cause severe loss and damage to the property of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the CR No.6440/2011 2 defendants in their evidence have examined DW2 Ravi Kumar, a Building and Structure Expert in support of their case. DW2 tendered his affidavit in his examination-in-chief on 2.2.2011 and the case was adjourned to 8.4.2011 for his cross examination. It is further submitted that on the next two dates i.e. 8.4.2011 and 23.5.2011, DW2 was not present for his cross examination. Thereafter DW2 was present on 28.9.2011 and his cross examination was deferred to 29.9.2011 after he had been partly cross examined. It is further submitted that on 29.9.2011 the remaining cross examination of DW2 could not be concluded due to the pre-occupation of the counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs in some other court resulting into passing of the impugned order. It is thus submitted that the entire blame cannot be put on the plaintiffs and further prays for grant of one opportunity in the interest of justice to complete the remaining cross-examination of the DW2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, for the view I propose to take, I do not deem it necessary to issue notice to respondents as it would unnecessarily cause delay and expenditure, who in any case are being proposed to be sufficiently compensated by way of costs. Keeping in view the nature of the dispute and the conduct of the petitioners/plaintiffs, I am satisfied that the entire blame cannot be attributed to the petitioners, and therefore, I deem it expedient in the interest of justice to grant one opportunity to the petitioners/plaintiffs CR No.6440/2011 3 to complete the remaining cross examination of DW2 lest it occasions mis-carriage of justice. Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 29.9.2011 (P1) is set aside and the trial court is directed to grant the petitioners/plaintiffs one opportunity to complete the remaining cross examination of DW2 on a date to be fixed by the trial court. It shall, however, be subject to payment of Rs.1000/- as costs payable to DW2 and Rs.4000/- to defendants in equal share. Payment of costs shall be a condition precedent. Disposed of in the above terms. 20.10.2011 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge