IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA (123) GURPREET SINGH JOGINDER PAL AND ANOTHER CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Present:- Mr. S.A. Khemka, Advocate, (Legal Aid Counsel) for the petition **** VIRINDER AGGARWAL The instant petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, vide which, defendant order dated 27.02.2025, whereby, Hoshiarpur has curtailed the right petitioner i.e. PW1 to PW3. The petitioner has taken a plea that initially, the cross-examination was closed and on his application, the learned Court granted one effective opportunity for cross of Rs.1,500/- (out of which, Rs.500/ 1,000/- to the plaintiff) and he has paid the said cost to the clerk of the counsel for paying the same to the plaintiff and vide impugned order, his righ examining the witnesses of the plaintiff compliance of the order. 2. Perusal of the record shows that initially, the application of the petitioner was allowed subject to the payment of cost of Rs.1,500/ which, Rs.500/- was to be paid in the account of DLSA, Hoshiarpur and 1,000/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR- Date of Decision: GURPREET SINGH Versus JOGINDER PAL AND ANOTHER -.- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Mr. S.A. Khemka, Advocate, (Legal Aid Counsel) for the petitioner. **** VIRINDER AGGARWAL, J. (Oral) The instant petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, vide which, defendant-petitioner herein has assailed the order dated 27.02.2025, whereby, learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Hoshiarpur has curtailed the right of cross-examination of witness(es) of petitioner i.e. PW1 to PW3. The petitioner has taken a plea that initially, the examination was closed and on his application, the learned Court granted one effective opportunity for cross-examination, subject t (out of which, Rs.500/- was to be paid in the account of DLSA and to the plaintiff) and he has paid the said cost to the clerk of the counsel for paying the same to the plaintiff and vide impugned order, his righ examining the witnesses of the plaintiff-respondent herein was curtailed for non compliance of the order. Perusal of the record shows that initially, the application of the petitioner was allowed subject to the payment of cost of Rs.1,500/ was to be paid in the account of DLSA, Hoshiarpur and 1,000/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -5509-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-19.08.2025 … Petitioner ... Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL Mr. S.A. Khemka, Advocate, (Legal Aid Counsel) The instant petition has been filed under Article 227 of the petitioner herein has assailed the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, examination of witness(es) of petitioner i.e. PW1 to PW3. The petitioner has taken a plea that initially, the examination was closed and on his application, the learned Court granted examination, subject to the payment of cost was to be paid in the account of DLSA and to the plaintiff) and he has paid the said cost to the clerk of the counsel for paying the same to the plaintiff and vide impugned order, his right to cross- respondent herein was curtailed for non- Perusal of the record shows that initially, the application of the petitioner was allowed subject to the payment of cost of Rs.1,500/- (out of was to be paid in the account of DLSA, Hoshiarpur and 1,000/- The instant petition has been filed under Article 227 of the petitioner herein has assailed the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, examination of witness(es) of petitioner i.e. PW1 to PW3. The petitioner has taken a plea that initially, the examination was closed and on his application, the learned Court granted o the payment of cost was to be paid in the account of DLSA and to the plaintiff) and he has paid the said cost to the clerk of the counsel - - Perusal of the record shows that initially, the application of the (out of - SAURAV PATHANIA 2025.08.19 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document to the plaintiff). In the present petition, petitioner has nowhere placed on record any receipt showing that the amount of Rs.500/ Judge has been deposited with DLSA, Hoshiarpur so the learned Civil Judge was right in closing the cross order dated 04.01.2025 but interest of justice requires that the party be given an opportunity to cross amount to condemning the petitioner unheard but in view of the default of the petitioner, petitioner is required to be burdered with heavy cost learned counsel representing the petit person being represented by a Legal 3. In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 27.02.2025 is modified by affording one single opportunity to the petitioner PW1 to PW3, subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/ Rs.2,000/- would be paid to DLSA, Hoshiarpur and each to the witnesses of plaintiff i.e. PW1 to PW3) 4. Copy of petitioner through Bench Secretary. 19.08.2025 S. Pathania Whether reasoned / speaking? Whether reportable? to the plaintiff). In the present petition, petitioner has nowhere placed on record any receipt showing that the amount of Rs.500/- has been deposited with DLSA, Hoshiarpur so the learned Civil Judge was right in closing the cross-examination of PW1 to PW3 for non order dated 04.01.2025 but interest of justice requires that the party be given an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses of the plaintiff otherwise it would amount to condemning the petitioner unheard but in view of the default of the petitioner, petitioner is required to be burdered with heavy cost learned counsel representing the petitioner submitted that petitioner is a poor person being represented by a Legal-Aid Counsel. In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 27.02.2025 is modified by affording one single opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses of the plaintiff i.e. PW1 to PW3, subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/ would be paid to DLSA, Hoshiarpur and each to the witnesses of plaintiff i.e. PW1 to PW3) opy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the through Bench Secretary. (VIRINDER AGGARWAL) Whether reasoned / speaking? Yes / No Whether reportable? Yes / No to the plaintiff). In the present petition, petitioner has nowhere placed on record - as ordered by the learned Civil has been deposited with DLSA, Hoshiarpur so the learned Civil Judge was examination of PW1 to PW3 for non-compliance of the order dated 04.01.2025 but interest of justice requires that the party be given an examine the witnesses of the plaintiff otherwise it would amount to condemning the petitioner unheard but in view of the default of the petitioner, petitioner is required to be burdered with heavy cost. At this stage, ioner submitted that petitioner is a poor Aid Counsel. In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 27.02.2025 is modified by affording one single examine the witnesses of the plaintiff i.e. PW1 to PW3, subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- (out of which amount, would be paid to DLSA, Hoshiarpur and out of remaining Rs.1,000/- each to the witnesses of plaintiff i.e. PW1 to PW3). to the learned counsel for the (VIRINDER AGGARWAL) JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No to the plaintiff). In the present petition, petitioner has nowhere placed on record as ordered by the learned Civil has been deposited with DLSA, Hoshiarpur so the learned Civil Judge was compliance of the order dated 04.01.2025 but interest of justice requires that the party be given an examine the witnesses of the plaintiff otherwise it would amount to condemning the petitioner unheard but in view of the default of the t this stage, ioner submitted that petitioner is a poor In view of the above, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 27.02.2025 is modified by affording one single examine the witnesses of the plaintiff i.e. (out of which amount, - to the learned counsel for the SAURAV PATHANIA 2025.08.19 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document