IN TH 208 Pardeep K Kamlesh C CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GU order date Additional of 2016, ti Mehta etc. by court or by the learn CR-5616-2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR Civil Revision N Date of decision eep Kumar Mehta Versus lesh Chander Mahajan and another AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NI None for the petitioner. Mr. Sumit Sinha, Advocate fo HI GUPTA J. (Oral) Prayer in this petition is for se r dated 07.8.2024 (Annexure P-2 tional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Hoshiar , titled as ‘Kamlesh Chander Mah tc.’, vide which evidence of the p urt order. On 07.8.2024 the following im e learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. D “In the last court proc recorded that the defendan insisting examination of witn testimony. It had already c defendant had been unable to otherwise of examination thi case. He was given an opp 1 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH ion No.5616 of 2024 cision :-04.02.2025 …..Petitioner other …..Respondents E NIDHI GUPTA ate for the respondents. s for setting aside the impugned 2) passed by the learned oshiarpur, in Civil Suit No.638 r Mahajan vs. Pardeep Kumar f the petitioner has been closed ing impugned order was passed e (Sr. Divn.), Hoshiarpur :- proceedings, It has been duly ndant has been persistently witness Vijay Bagga in his y come on record that the le to disclose the relevancy or this witness in the present opportunity to disclose the VIJAY ASIJA 2025.02.10 15.50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-5616-2024 relevancy of examining thi counsel has apprised that h cannot disclose the relevancy provision in the court wher defendant could be entertain averment of the defendant th evidence of this witness con basis. The defendant or his failed to disclose the relevan recorded before this court. been tendered by the def Furthermore, an application w which is there on the record revision petition before the challenging the order and tha engage the counsel therein. H reveals that there is no orde High court staying the procee at hand. Mere submission o intends to pursue with his revi the counsel, is no ground to present case. Perusal of the f opportunities had already defendant to lead his evidence conclude the same. Thus, defendant to seek adjournm revision petition is far-fetche facts and circumstances of th deem it appropriate to adjou evidence again and in light already availed numerous opp evidence, Accordingly, his evi Now case is adjourned to evidence if any or for argumen 2 this witness, however his at his party states that he ancy to the court. There is no wherein such request of the rtained and furthermore, the nt that he wants to keep the confidential is without any his counsel have remained levancy of the witness to be urt. Certain documents have defendant on the record. ion was filed by the defendant cord that since he had filed the Hon'ble High Court for d that a long date be given to n. However, perusal of the file order passed by the Hon'ble roceedings of the instant case on of the defendant that he revision and wants to engage to grant adjournment in the the file reveals that numerous ady been granted to the ence, however he has failed to hus, the contention of the urnment to pursue with his etched. Thus, in light of the of the present case, I do not djourn the case for defendant ight of the fact that he had opportunities to conclude his s evidence is closed by order. to 30.08.2024 for rebuttal uments.” VIJAY ASIJA 2025.02.10 15.50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Vijay Kum was summ witness app but the lear matter was the said wi dated 30.7 objected to unable to d the said re impugned o the learned irreparable P-2) is not appearance He submits allowed. canvassed counsel for impugned learned Co enable the p CR-5616-2024 It is submitted in the petitioin Kumar Bagga, Clerk/Ahlmad is a ver summoned by the Court many time ess appeared in the Court on 08.8.202 he learned Court refused to record his er was adjourned time and again for r aid witness but he had failed to appe 30.7.2024 learned Court observed cted to examine the said witness and le to disclose the relevancy of the sai aid reason the evidence of the petiti gned order dated 07.8.2024 (Annexur earned trial Court. It is also pleaded that the arable loss if the impugned order dat is not set aside. At this stage, Mr. Sumit Sin arance and filed Power of Attorney ubmits that he has no objection in ca Accordingly, keeping in v assed in the petition, and the ‘No sel for the respondents in case the pres gned order dated 07.8.2024 (Annex ed Court below is directed to grant o le the petitioner herein to conclude his 3 etitioin that the witness namely is a very important witness, who y times. Ultimately, the said .8.2023 at around 3:00 O’clock rd his statement. Thereafter the n for recording the statement of appear. Thereafter vide order erved that the respondent has ss and that the petitioner was the said witness and because of petitioner was closed and the nexure P-2) has been passed by t the petitioner would suffer er dated 07.8.2024 (Annexure it Sinha, Advocate has put in rney on behalf of respondents. in case the present petition is in view the above facts as ‘No Objection’ of the learned he present petition is allowed, the Annexure P-2) is set aside. The rant one effective opportunity to de his evidence. VIJAY ASIJA 2025.02.10 15.50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document February 0 Vijay Asija Whether spea Whether Repo CR-5616-2024 Disposed of as above. Pending application(s), if any, uary 04, 2025 r speaking/reasoned Yes / No r Reportable Yes / No 4 if any, stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2025.02.10 15.50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document