CM-6905 CR-5851- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 128 MAJOR SINGH (THROUGH HIS LRS) AND ANR AMARJIT SINGH CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: SUVIR SEHGAL CM-6905 1. the main petition, which is fixed for 16.07.2025 is advanced to today and the petition is ordered to be taken on Board. 2. CR-5851- 3. Constitution of India 6905-CII-2025 in/and -2023 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH MAJOR SINGH (THROUGH HIS LRS) AND ANR VS. AMARJIT SINGH CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Mr. Akshay Chadha, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. G.S. Punia, Senior Advocate with Ms. Harveen Kaur, Advocate for the respondent. **** SUVIR SEHGAL, J. 6905-CII-2025 For the reasons given in the application, the main petition, which is fixed for 16.07.2025 is advanced to today and the petition is ordered to be taken on Board. Application is disposed off. -2023 Instant revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside orders dated 01.03.2023 and IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM-6905-CII-2025 in/and CR-5851-2023 Date of decision:04.04.2025 MAJOR SINGH (THROUGH HIS LRS) AND ANR. ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT SUVIR SEHGAL Mr. Akshay Chadha, Advocate .S. Punia, Senior Advocate with Ms. Harveen Kaur, Advocate For the reasons given in the application, the date of hearing of the main petition, which is fixed for 16.07.2025 is advanced to today and the Instant revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the for setting aside orders dated 01.03.2023 and .2025 PETITIONERS ESPONDENT the date of hearing of the main petition, which is fixed for 16.07.2025 is advanced to today and the Instant revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the for setting aside orders dated 01.03.2023 and Sheetal 2025.04.08 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CM-6905 CR-5851- 16.09.2023, Annexures P petitioners/defendants was Annexure P 4. filed a suit for declaration to the effect that the share of Major Singh, deceased, in the suit property hindu family defendant primarily relates to the validity of He states that upon being served, petitioner filing a written statement plaintiff concluded their evidence on 09.11.2021 and they were many as 54 effective opportunities. However, without giving opportunity to the defendants, Trial Court vide impugned order, Annexure P-11, closed their evidence. Counsel asserts that immediately moved for recalling of the said order vide order, Annexure making a reference to the asserts that the were not issued to them by the concerned sought his effective opportunity to produce responsibility. 6905-CII-2025 in/and -2023 -2- 16.09.2023, Annexures P-11 and P-13, respectively, petitioners/defendants was closed and an applicati Annexure P-12, has been dismissed. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the filed a suit for declaration to the effect that the share of Major Singh, deceased, in the suit property hindu family property and sought permanent injunction restraining defendants from alienating the suit property. primarily relates to the validity of Will executed by Major Singh, deceased. He states that upon being served, petitioner written statement. Counsel submits that after issues were framed, ff concluded their evidence on 09.11.2021 and they were many as 54 effective opportunities. However, without giving opportunity to the defendants, Trial Court vide impugned order, Annexure 11, closed their evidence. Counsel asserts that immediately moved for recalling of the said order vide order, Annexure P-13, which is also making a reference to the interim orders asserts that the witnesses could not be examined by the defendants as notices were not issued to them by the Ahlmad and the Trial Court issued notice to the concerned Ahlmad under Section 36 of the his explanation. Counsel submits that the defendants be granted one effective opportunity to produce the entire evidence responsibility. , respectively, whereby evidence of an application for recall of order, submits that the respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he is joint owner in possession of the share of Major Singh, deceased, in the suit property which is a joint sought permanent injunction restraining from alienating the suit property. Counsel states that the dispute Will executed by Major Singh, deceased. He states that upon being served, petitioners/defendants contested the suit by . Counsel submits that after issues were framed, ff concluded their evidence on 09.11.2021 and they were granted many as 54 effective opportunities. However, without giving ample opportunity to the defendants, Trial Court vide impugned order, Annexure 11, closed their evidence. Counsel asserts that an application was immediately moved for recalling of the said order, which has been declined 13, which is also being impugned herein. By passed by the Trial Court, counsel witnesses could not be examined by the defendants as notices and the Trial Court issued notice to under Section 36 of the Punjab Courts Act and has . Counsel submits that the defendants be granted one the entire evidence at their own whereby evidence of on for recall of order, plaintiff owner in possession of is a joint sought permanent injunction restraining the that the dispute Will executed by Major Singh, deceased. the suit by . Counsel submits that after issues were framed, granted as ample opportunity to the defendants, Trial Court vide impugned order, Annexure an application was , which has been declined impugned herein. By passed by the Trial Court, counsel witnesses could not be examined by the defendants as notices and the Trial Court issued notice to Act and has . Counsel submits that the defendants be granted one at their own Sheetal 2025.04.08 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CM-6905 CR-5851- 5. that the defendants were given as many as 24 opportunities to lead their evidence, but they could not produce their witnesses. He submits that even cost was imposed upon the to their la the defendants are pro witnesses in one and a half year. 6. respective submissions besides examining the documents record. 7. and despite witnesses the defendants are not given an effective opportunity to produce their entire evidence, their d the view that an opportunity deserves to be granted to them. 8. 01.03.2023 and Petitioners/ entire evidence at their own responsibility, subject to deposit of cost of Rs.20,000/ Housing Board Chowk, Raen Basera Building, Manimajr Chandigarh, Account No 9. opportunity can be availed. 6905-CII-2025 in/and -2023 -3- While opposing the petition that the defendants were given as many as 24 opportunities to lead their evidence, but they could not produce their witnesses. He submits that even cost was imposed upon them and they were given last opportunity to their laxity, they did not conclude their evidence. It the defendants are procrastinating the trial and ha witnesses in one and a half year. I have heard counsel for the parties and considered their respective submissions besides examining the documents Undisputedly, defendants have and despite availing numerous opportunities, they have . Onus of proving some of the issues is on the defendants. In case, the defendants are not given an effective opportunity to produce their entire evidence, their defence is likely to be effected. This Court is, therefore, of the view that an opportunity deserves to be granted to them. Accordingly, petition is allowed. Impugned orders dated 01.03.2023 and 16.09.2023, Annexures P Petitioners/defendants are granted one effective opportunity to lead their entire evidence at their own responsibility, subject to deposit of cost of Rs.20,000/- with the Sadhna Society for Mentally Handicapped, Near Housing Board Chowk, Raen Basera Building, Manimajr Chandigarh, Account No.110410011001558 Deposit of cost shall be a condition precedent before the opportunity can be availed. hile opposing the petition, counsel for the respondent urges that the defendants were given as many as 24 opportunities to lead their evidence, but they could not produce their witnesses. He submits that even and they were given last opportunity, but due lude their evidence. It is his assertion that ing the trial and have produced only two I have heard counsel for the parties and considered their respective submissions besides examining the documents placed on the have been remiss in leading evidence numerous opportunities, they have examined only two nus of proving some of the issues is on the defendants. In case, the defendants are not given an effective opportunity to produce their entire is likely to be effected. This Court is, therefore, of the view that an opportunity deserves to be granted to them. Accordingly, petition is allowed. Impugned orders dated 16.09.2023, Annexures P-11 and P-13, are set aside. granted one effective opportunity to lead their entire evidence at their own responsibility, subject to deposit of cost of Sadhna Society for Mentally Handicapped, Near Housing Board Chowk, Raen Basera Building, Manimajra, Sector 13, 110410011001558, IFSC Code:- ANDB000110. Deposit of cost shall be a condition precedent before the , counsel for the respondent urges that the defendants were given as many as 24 opportunities to lead their evidence, but they could not produce their witnesses. He submits that even , but due is his assertion that ve produced only two I have heard counsel for the parties and considered their placed on the leading evidence examined only two nus of proving some of the issues is on the defendants. In case, the defendants are not given an effective opportunity to produce their entire is likely to be effected. This Court is, therefore, of Accordingly, petition is allowed. Impugned orders dated 13, are set aside. granted one effective opportunity to lead their entire evidence at their own responsibility, subject to deposit of cost of Sadhna Society for Mentally Handicapped, Near a, Sector 13, . Deposit of cost shall be a condition precedent before the Sheetal 2025.04.08 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CM-6905 CR-5851- 10. and the Trial Court evidence at their own cost and responsibility. 04.04.2025 sheetal 6905-CII-2025 in/and -2023 -4- Petitioners shall appear before Trial Court would fix a date to enable evidence at their own cost and responsibility. .2025 Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No shall appear before the Trial Court on 15.04.2025 would fix a date to enable them to produce their entire evidence at their own cost and responsibility. (SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No the Trial Court on 15.04.2025 to produce their entire Sheetal 2025.04.08 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Chandigarh