CRM No. M 23141 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 23141 2009 Date of decision: 15.02.2010 M/s Raja Enterprises and another ........Petitioner Versus Davinder Jit Singh Chawla and another .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Vishwajit Bedi, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Advocate for the complainant -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. The only prayer made in the present petition is for issuance of direction to the learned trial Court to provide an opportunity to the petitioners to cross examine the complainant witness. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the trial Court vide order dated 20.04.2009 closed the evidence of the complainant witnesses without providing sufficient opportunity of cross examining. It is further stated that the complaint filed by the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was fixed for evidence of the complainant for 29.11.2008. No witness of the complainant was present on CRM No. M 23141 2009 2 the said date, the case was adjourned to 26.02.2009. On that date, Davinderjit Singh Chalwa - witness was present but as counsel for the counsel for the petitioners was not available, the case was adjourned to 20.04.2009. Last opportunity to cross examine the complainant - witness was given subject to payment of Rs.500/- as costs. It is stated that vide order dated 20.04.2009 CW1 Davinderjit Singh was examined by the complainant counsel but no opportunity to cross examine him was granted. Learned counsel for the answering respondent opposed the same on facts and stated that in fact the complainant had been examined much earlier and the case was only fixed for cross examination on 20.04.2009 and it was due to the lapse on the part of the petitioners and failure to cross examine the witness that the evidence of the complainant- witness was closed. Be that as it may, the petitioners have been deprived of their right to defend themselves. CW1- Davinder Jit Singh Chawla is the material and the only witness. It is further stated that the counsel for the petitioners was busy in other Court. It is submitted that an oral request was also made on his behalf but the order dated 20.04.2009 closing the evidence of the witness was passed in his absence. The litigants should not be made to suffer due to the lapse on the part of the counsel. Thus, in the interest of justice, it is important to grant one last opportunity to the petitioners to cross examine CW1. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and the order dated 20.04.2009 passed by the trial Court vide which the evidence was closed is set aside. Accordingly, one last opportunity is granted to the CRM No. M 23141 2009 3 petitioners to cross examine the CW1 subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as costs. The petitioners shall now appear before the trial Court on the next date of hearing and cross examine CW1 on the same date. The complainant- CW1 shall make himself available for cross examination on that date. However, in case, the complainant is unable to attend for any reason on the said date, he shall make himself available on any date as fixed by the trial Court, on which date the counsel for the petitioners may be allowed to examine him. Disposed off in the above terms. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge February 15, 2010 mohan