C.R. No. 5419 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 5419 of 2009 Date of Decision: September 18, 2009 Paramjit Kaur …..Petitioner Vs. Gurudwara Sahib Baba Gandha Singh …..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr. Tribhawan Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) In an application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC by the petitioner, the respondent has been permitted to prove the summons to establish that applicant was duly served with the summons. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the evidence has been reopened and an opportunity has been given to the respondent to produce evidence after the same has been closed. C.R. No. 5419 of 2009 [2] After hearing counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the document which is sought to be produced and proved is necessary for the determination of the real controversy. No fault can be found with the order. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in the garb of the impugned order, besides the summons, some other material is also likely to be produced. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that it is only the summons which have ordered to be produced and not any other evidence while allowing the application under Section 151 CPC. The said apprehension of the petitioner seems to be misconceived. The petitioner can always object to the other evidence, if any, produced by the respondent in the garb of impugned order. Dismissed. September 18, 2009 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE