CR-6139-2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 265 S. Uttam Singh Kohli (since deceased) through his LRs Om Parkash (since deceased) through his LRs and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. 1. on record. 2. Constitution of India 09.05.2024 (Annexure P evidence of the plaintiff 03.10.2024 (Annexure P petitioner for recalling of the order dated the learned trial Court. 3. acknowledge 03.10.2024 (Annexure P for recalling the order dated being not maintainable. 2024 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH S. Uttam Singh Kohli (since deceased) through his LRs Versus Om Parkash (since deceased) through his LRs and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. GS Bhandal, Advocate for the petitioner(s) Mr. HK Aurora, Advocate for respondent No. 1(a). NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Vakalatnama filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 Prayer in this revision petition Constitution of India, is for setting aside the impugned order dated 09.05.2024 (Annexure P-13) passed by the learned trial Court whereby evidence of the plaintiff-petitioner was closed by order; and order dated 03.10.2024 (Annexure P-16), vide which the application filed by the petitioner for recalling of the order dated the learned trial Court. At the very outset, learned counsel for the plaintiff acknowledges that the present revision petition qua 03.10.2024 (Annexure P-16) dismissing the application of the petitioner for recalling the order dated 09.05.2024 (Annexure P being not maintainable. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-6139-2024 Date of Decision: 25.08.2025 S. Uttam Singh Kohli (since deceased) through his LRs .… Petitioner(s) Om Parkash (since deceased) through his LRs and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. GS Bhandal, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. HK Aurora, Advocate for respondent No. 1(a). filed on behalf of respondent No. 1(a) is taken ion petition filed under Article 227 of the is for setting aside the impugned order dated 13) passed by the learned trial Court whereby petitioner was closed by order; and order dated 16), vide which the application filed by the petitioner for recalling of the order dated 09.05.2024, was dismissed by At the very outset, learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner the present revision petition qua impugned order dated dismissing the application of the petitioner 09.05.2024 (Annexure P-13) be dismissed is taken under Article 227 of the is for setting aside the impugned order dated 13) passed by the learned trial Court whereby petitioner was closed by order; and order dated 16), vide which the application filed by the was dismissed by petitioner impugned order dated dismissing the application of the petitioner dismissed RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.27 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-6139-2024 4. 5. that only 02 witnesses a submitted that although, the 2015; and issues were framed on petitioner had commenced only on respondent submitted that the said witnesses, PW as, in respect of PW Registrar, he ha evident from his statement dated 08.05.2024 of the paper submitted that the Process that PW-2 has expired. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the affidavit of the petitioner (at page 169 of the paper that the petitioner had met PW 08.05.2024 examination of the said witnesses has occurred due to the aforesaid reasons. 6. to controvert the petitioner-plaintiff. 7. the case as well as the averments made in the petition principles of natural justice, equity, good conscie 2024 -2- Ordered accordingly. Learned counsel for the petitioner/ that only 02 witnesses are remained to be examined by the petitioner. submitted that although, the suit was filed ; and issues were framed on 21.03.2016 petitioner had commenced only on 10.04.2023 respondent-defendants application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. It is submitted that the said witnesses, PW-1 and PW as, in respect of PW-1 who is the concerned Clerk of the Office of Sub he had stated that he is not able to evident from his statement dated 08.05.2024 of the paper-book). As regards, PW-2 Prithvi Paul, Deed Writer submitted that the Process-server had submitted the rep 2 has expired. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the affidavit of the petitioner (at page 169 of the paper that the petitioner had met PW-2 Prithvi Paul, Deed Writer 08.05.2024 i.e. after the date of summons. examination of the said witnesses has occurred due to the aforesaid Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 to controvert the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the plaintiff. In view of the above and without commenting upon merits of as well as the averments made in the petition principles of natural justice, equity, good conscie Learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff, further submits to be examined by the petitioner. It is ed by the petitioner in the year 21.03.2016, however, evidence of the 10.04.2023 i.e. after the dismissal of under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. It is 1 and PW-2 could not be examined 1 who is the concerned Clerk of the Office of Sub he is not able to appear on 09.05.2024, as is evident from his statement dated 08.05.2024 (Annexure P-17 at page 142 2 Prithvi Paul, Deed Writer, it is had submitted the report stating therein 2 has expired. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the affidavit of the petitioner (at page 169 of the paper-book) deposing therein 2 Prithvi Paul, Deed Writer in person after It is submitted that the delay in examination of the said witnesses has occurred due to the aforesaid Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1(a) is unable aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the ithout commenting upon merits of as well as the averments made in the petition, but in view of principles of natural justice, equity, good conscience and fair play; the plaintiff, further submits It is by the petitioner in the year owever, evidence of the i.e. after the dismissal of under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. It is 2 could not be examined 1 who is the concerned Clerk of the Office of Sub appear on 09.05.2024, as is 17 at page 142 , it is stating therein 2 has expired. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the book) deposing therein in person after It is submitted that the delay in examination of the said witnesses has occurred due to the aforesaid (a) is unable aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the ithout commenting upon merits of , but in view of RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.27 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CR-6139-2024 impugned order directed that t to examine the aforesaid witnesses at his own responsibility. 8. permission to effect service upon PW Registrar and PW recording their statements before the learned trial Court 9. 10. 11. 25.08.2025 rishu 2024 -3- impugned order dated 09.05.2024 (Annexure P directed that the petitioner/petitioner be granted one effective opportunity examine the aforesaid witnesses at his own responsibility. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to effect service upon PW-1 Clerk of the office of Sub Registrar and PW-2 Prithvi Paul, Deed Writer, through recording their statements before the learned trial Court Permitted to do so. The instant revision petition stands Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. .2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable 09.05.2024 (Annexure P-13) is set aside. It is granted one effective opportunity examine the aforesaid witnesses at his own responsibility. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks 1 Clerk of the office of Sub 2 Prithvi Paul, Deed Writer, through dasti process for recording their statements before the learned trial Court. The instant revision petition stands disposed of, accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No It is granted one effective opportunity At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks 1 Clerk of the office of Sub for RISHU KATARIA 2025.08.27 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.