IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.2837 of 2009 Date of decision:18.05.2009 Sher Singh ...Petitioner versus Arjan Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN Present: Mr.Arihant Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. ----- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The permission of the petitioner to examine in support of his case a hand writing/thumb-impression expert to speak about the disputed document, was rejected by the Court below, observing that the application had been filed at the fag end of the trial and that the application ought not to be entertained. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the evidence of the respondent had not even commenced and the application presented even before the commencement of his evidence ought not to be found fault with. While the trial Court has full power to control its board and assign appropriate time to be taken for concluding the evidence of parties, the delay in approaching the Court cannot be put against such a Civil Revision No.2837 of 2009 - 2 - party if evidence of its side itself has not even commenced. Under the circumstances, the order passed by the Court below is set aside and the petitioner shall be at liberty to take appropriate steps for examining the expert in support of his case. 3. The order is being passed at the stage of admission without serving notice upon the respondent to ensure speedier trial and not to cause the pendency of civil revision as stumbling block for the progress of the trial. 4. The Civil Revision is disposed of in the above terms. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 18.05.2009 sanjeev