IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 5975 of 2010 Date of Decision: September 16, 2010 Prit Pal Singh. …Petitioner Versus Chanan Singh … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be Allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Malhar Singh Dhami, Advocate, for the petitioner. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 12.08.2010 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dasuya, whereby the evidence of the plaintiff – petitioner was directed to be closed. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the son of the plaintiff suffered from serious injuries due to fall of C.R.5975 of 2010 hot tea and as a result, the plaintiff - petitioner was busy in treatment of his son in the Sharma Clinic at Garhdiwala and he could not come to the Court for leading his evidence. Learned counsel further states that now case is listing for 29.09.2010 for the purpose of recording of evidence of the defendant. It is further stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as yet defendant’s evidence has not been commenced. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I direct that on 29.09.2010, the learned Trial Court shall fix a date for the purpose of plaintiff’s evidence and on such date, plaintiff shall produce all the witnesses before the learned Trial Court. Witnesses so produced by the plaintiff shall be examined and in case all the witnesses are not examined on the said date, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to hold day-to-day trial or to fix any future date as Trial Court deems fit. However, no adjournment shall be granted to the plaintiff – petitioner. Plaintiff –petitioner shall pay Rs.5,000/- as cost to the defendant on the next date i.e. 29.09.2010. The petition shall stand disposed of accordingly. September 16, 2010 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 2