CR-4341-2022 (O&M) 142 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Babaljeet Kaur @ Baljit Kaur and another Versus Lakhvir Singh and another CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Manav Prateek, Advocate for the petitioners (through VC). Mr. Abhay Gupta, Advocate for the respondents. HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of present revision petition, challenge has been laid to an order dated 19.09.2022 passed by the Court of Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Samrala, whereby application preferred at the instance of petitioners/ plaint (Retired Kanungo) to produce copies of istamal’ and ‘Naqsha Huqdarbar’ excerpt, was declined. 2. Briefly stating, the petitioners/ p possession and permanent injunction qua their rights to the share in estate of deceased Mohinder Singh, hands of Mohinder Singh was of ancestral nature. In response, the respondents/ defendants set up a Will dated 15.03.2011 by deceased-Mohinder Singh 2022 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-4341 Date of Decision: Babaljeet Kaur @ Baljit Kaur and another Versus Lakhvir Singh and another CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Manav Prateek, Advocate for the petitioners (through VC). Mr. Abhay Gupta, Advocate for the respondents. -.- HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of present revision petition, challenge has been laid to an order dated 19.09.2022 passed by the Court of Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Samrala, whereby application preferred at the instance of petitioners/ plaintiffs seeking permission to recall PW2 (Retired Kanungo) to produce copies of ‘Khatauni istamal’ and ‘Naqsha Huqdarbar’, being part and parcel of his report/ excerpt, was declined. Briefly stating, the petitioners/ p and permanent injunction qua their rights to the share in estate of deceased Mohinder Singh, asserting hands of Mohinder Singh was of ancestral nature. In response, the ts/ defendants set up a Will dated 15.03.2011 Mohinder Singh in their favour qua the suit land. Upon 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 4341-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 06.05.2026 ….Petitioners …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA By way of present revision petition, challenge has been laid to an order dated 19.09.2022 passed by the Court of Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Samrala, whereby application preferred at the instance of iffs seeking permission to recall PW2-Balwinder Singh ‘Khatauni-Paimaish’, ‘Khatauni being part and parcel of his report/ Briefly stating, the petitioners/ plaintiffs filed a suit for joint and permanent injunction qua their rights to the share in the asserting that the suit property in the hands of Mohinder Singh was of ancestral nature. In response, the ts/ defendants set up a Will dated 15.03.2011 allegedly executed in their favour qua the suit land. Upon 1 …Respondents By way of present revision petition, challenge has been laid to an order dated 19.09.2022 passed by the Court of Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Samrala, whereby application preferred at the instance of Balwinder Singh Paimaish’, ‘Khatauni- being part and parcel of his report/ joint the that the suit property in the hands of Mohinder Singh was of ancestral nature. In response, the allegedly executed in their favour qua the suit land. Upon SANJAY GUPTA 2026.05.07 16:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-4341-2022 (O&M) 2 framing of issues on 25.08.2014, the proceedings were adjourned for recording the evidence of respondents/ defendants at the first instance and the same was closed on 18.12.2018. Thereafter, the matter was posted for recording of evidence of petitioners/ plaintiffs, wherein on 03.09.2019, PW2-Balwinder Singh, Special Kanungo appeared and produced his report pertaining to the excerpts. The evidence of the petitioners/ plaintiffs was subsequently closed vide order dated 30.08.2022. However, soon thereafter on 06.09.2022, the petitioners/ plaintiffs moved an application with a prayer for recalling of PW2-Balwinder Singh, Special Kanungo, (who retired in the meantime), for production of copies of ‘Khatauni-Paimaish’, ‘Khatauni-istamal’ and ‘Naqsha Huqdarbar’, which were part and parcel of his excerpt/report dated 19.12.2019. 3. The prayer made in the said application was opposed at the hands of the respondents/ defendants. The learned trial Court vide order dated 19.09.2022 dismissed the application preferred at the instance petitioners/ plaintiffs. Hence, the present revision petition. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. 5. In the given facts and circumstances, wherein the primary dispute relates to the nature of the suit property in the hands of deceased Mohinder Singh, the documents in the form of ‘Khatauni-Paimaish’, ‘Khatauni-istamal’ and ‘Naqsha Huqdarbar’ which form part of the report/ excerpt dated 19.12.2019 prepared by Balwinder Singh, Special Kanungo (PW2) become essential for the purpose of adjudication of the case in hand as the same would help the learned trial Court to arrive at a just conclusion qua the rights of respective parties in the suit. SANJAY GUPTA 2026.05.07 16:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-4341-2022 (O&M) 3 6. In such circumstances, rather than going by technicalities, the leaned trial Court was required to adopt a pragmatic approach by allowing the application made on behalf of the petitioners/ plaintiffs for recalling of PW2 Balwinder Singh, Special Kanungo, for the purpose of production of the relevant documents relating to his report dated 19.12.2019. 7. It is also pertinent to note that the evidence of the petitioners/ plaintiffs was closed only on 30.08.2022 and the application was preferred immediately thereafter on 06.09.2022, besides the petitioners/ plaintiffs having acted in bona fide manner while producing on record the excerpts through the revenue official i.e. PW2-Balwinder Singh, Special Kanungo, by any stretch of imagination, their conduct in pursuing the suit nowhere attribute any negligence to them. 8. Furthermore, once the excerpts dated 19.12.2019 were already part of the record, prayer for production of documents such as ‘Khatauni- Paimaish’, ‘Khatauni-istamal’ and ‘Naqsha Huqdarbar’ which were the basis of the said report, cannot be construed as an attempt to fill –in the lacunae in the case of the petitioners/ plaintiffs. Rather, it is in furtherance of the evidence already led. 9. In such circumstances, the revision petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 19.09.2022 passed by the learned Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Samrala is hereby set aside and the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners/ plaintiffs is accepted. The learned trial Court shall proceed further in accordance with law. 10. However, considering the fact that the present revision petition has been a compulsive litigation for the respondents/ defendants, as such the petitioners/ plaintiffs are directed to pay costs of Rs.20000/- to be paid SANJAY GUPTA 2026.05.07 16:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-4341-2022 (O&M) 4 to the respondents/ defendants on the next date of hearing fixed before the learned trial Court. 11. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 06.05.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) sanjay JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Whether Reportable? Yes/No SANJAY GUPTA 2026.05.07 16:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document