C.R. No. 2349 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 2349 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 7.4.2010 ... Satnam Singh ................Petitioner vs. Gurcharan Singh .................Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri Present: Sh. Deepak Arora, Advocate for the petitioner ... K.C. Puri, J. (Oral) This is a revision petition against the order dated 19.2.2010 Annexure P-1, vide which the evidence of the defendant-petitioner was closed by order. The prayer made in the present petition is to allow one opportunity to the defendant-petitioner to lead the entire evidence. Notice of the petition need not be given to the opposite party as the material on record is sufficient to allow the petitioner an opportunity to lead his evidence. From the perusal of the file, it is revealed that the case was fixed for 13.10.2009 and on that date examination-in-chief of 3 Dws was recorded and cross examination was deferred on the request of C.R. No. 2349 of 2010 -2- counsel for the plaintiff and the case was adjourned to 20.11.2009. The three witnesses were bound down. On 20.11.2009 DW-1 was partly cross examined and further cross examination was deferred for want of record. Witness was bound down for 6.1.2010 with the direction to produce the said record on the next date and further cross examination of DW-1 and remaining DWs. On 6.1.2010, one DW was cross examined and no other DW was present and the case was adjourned to 19.2.2010 for cross examination of remaining DWs subject to last opportunity and it was made clear that no further opportunity shall be granted for that purpose. According to the defendant-petitioner, on 19.2.2010 due to death of some close friend of the petitioner, the request was made by the counsel for the defendant-petitioner to adjourn the matter. However, the trial Court closed the evidence by order. From the perusal of the record, it is crystal clear that defendant-petitioner has produced all his witnesses on 13.10.2009 and the case was adjourned only on the request of counsel for the plaintiff, now respondent. Again on 20.11.2009, cross examination of DW-1 was not completed for want of complete record. So, in these circumstances, the defendant has produced the witnesses and if the witnesses would have absented, then the trial Court should have taken coercive methods to secure their presence. So, in these circumstances, the impugned order dated 19.2.2010 stands set aside and the defendant-petitioner is allowed one opportunity to lead the entire evidence by taking dasti summons. It is stated at the Bar that the case is fixed for 14.4.2010 C.R. No. 2349 of 2010 -3- before the trial Court. So, the entire evidence be produced by the defendant-petitioner on that date. ( K.C. Puri ) 7.4.2010 Judge chugh