CR-4566-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 130 Gurmail Singh Anil Kumar Handa CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA PRESENT: NIDHI GUPTA, J. 1. of the Constitution of India read with Section 151 CPC, for setting aside the impugned order dated Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hoshiarpur in Civil Suit dated 31.08.2020, titled as ‘ whereby the petitioner 2. petitioner that vide impugned order dated evidence has been closed by order. It shall be caused to the petitioner in case, he is not evidence. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner changed his counsel and is ready to conclude his evidence opportunities. The petitioner has to examine official witnesses 2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Gurmail Singh Versus Anil Kumar Handa CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA PRESENT: Mr. Tushaar Madan, Advocate for the petitioner. NIDHI GUPTA, J. The present revision petition has been filed under Article of the Constitution of India read with Section 151 CPC, for setting aside the impugned order dated 29.05.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hoshiarpur in Civil Suit 31.08.2020, titled as ‘Gurmail Singh whereby the petitioner-plaintiff’s evidence was closed by order. It is, inter alia, submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that vide impugned order dated evidence has been closed by order. It is submitted that grave injustice shall be caused to the petitioner in case, he is not Learned counsel submits that the petitioner changed his counsel and is ready to conclude his evidence opportunities. The petitioner has to examine official witnesses IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-4566-2025 Date of decision: 21.07.2025 ..... Petitioner ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA . Tushaar Madan, Advocate for the petitioner. The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 151 CPC, for setting aside passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hoshiarpur in Civil Suit No. 673/2020 Gurmail Singh vs. Anil Kumar Handa’, plaintiff’s evidence was closed by order. submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that vide impugned order dated 29.05.2025, the petitioner’s is submitted that grave injustice shall be caused to the petitioner in case, he is not allowed to lead his Learned counsel submits that the petitioner-plaintiff has now changed his counsel and is ready to conclude his evidence in 02 effective opportunities. The petitioner has to examine official witnesses and as of the Constitution of India read with Section 151 CPC, for setting aside No. 673/2020 , submitted by learned counsel for the , the petitioner’s is submitted that grave injustice allowed to lead his plaintiff has now 02 effective and as RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.24 09:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-4566-2025 such, delay has occurred in conclusion of evidence. Accordingly, it is prayed that 02 effective conclude his entire evidence. 3. petitioner. 4. gone through the case file. 5. petitioner. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had filed a suit for recovery of of the petitioner that on different dates, the said amount was transferred through RTGS in account of respondent. framed by the learned trial Court as far as back on 1 petitioner ha has been closed the fact that the petitioner has availed as many as, 28 effective opportunities counsel for the petitioner. opportunities have been granted to No reason has been shown by the petitioner that would ju further opportunity. Even no reason has been given by the petitioner as to why he was unable to conclude his evidence during opportunities 2025 -2- such, delay has occurred in conclusion of evidence. Accordingly, it is prayed that 02 effective opportunities be conclude his entire evidence. No other argument has been raised by I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully gone through the case file. I find no merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of . Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had filed a suit for recovery of ₹10,00,000/- against the respondent of the petitioner that on different dates, the said amount was transferred through RTGS in account of respondent. framed by the learned trial Court as far as back on 1 petitioner had lead evidence as PW-1. However, evidence of the petitioner has been closed vide impugned order dated the fact that the petitioner has availed as many as, 28 effective opportunities to conclude his evidence. This fact is not denied by learned counsel for the petitioner. Thus, it is clear opportunities have been granted to the petitioner to No reason has been shown by the petitioner that would ju further opportunity. Even no reason has been given by the petitioner as to why he was unable to conclude his evidence during opportunities. It is to be appreciated that valuable such, delay has occurred in conclusion of evidence. Accordingly, it is opportunities be granted to the petitioner to argument has been raised by learned counsel for the I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully I find no merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the . Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had filed a suit for against the respondent-defendant. It is the case of the petitioner that on different dates, the said amount was transferred through RTGS in account of respondent. Admittedly, the issues were framed by the learned trial Court as far as back on 19.04.2023. Thereafter, However, evidence of the petitioner vide impugned order dated 29.05.2025, keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has availed as many as, 28 effective This fact is not denied by learned Thus, it is clear that more than sufficient the petitioner to conclude his evidence. No reason has been shown by the petitioner that would justify grant of further opportunity. Even no reason has been given by the petitioner as to why he was unable to conclude his evidence during these 28 valuable public time of the Court such, delay has occurred in conclusion of evidence. Accordingly, it is granted to the petitioner to counsel for the I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully the . Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had filed a suit for defendant. It is the case of the petitioner that on different dates, the said amount was transferred Admittedly, the issues were 9.04.2023. Thereafter, However, evidence of the petitioner 29.05.2025, keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has availed as many as, 28 effective This fact is not denied by learned more than sufficient conclude his evidence. stify grant of further opportunity. Even no reason has been given by the petitioner as to these 28 public time of the Court RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.24 09:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-4566-2025 cannot be lackadaisical litigants. 6. to exercise the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. 7. 8. 21.07.2025 rishu 2025 -3- cannot be whiled away in affording lackadaisical litigants. In view of the discussion above to exercise the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. Dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall also 21.07.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable innumerable opportunities to bove, I find no ground is made out to exercise the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Yes/No opportunities to no ground is made out RISHU KATARIA 2025.07.24 09:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.