2026:HHC:33180 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.  : 427 of 2026 Decided On    : 07.08.2026 Kalyan Singh …Petitioner Versus Jagat Singh …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Suresh Singh Saini, Advocate. For the respondent : None. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) The petitioner has been arrayed as defendant in Civil   Suit   No.   30/2021,   titled   as   “Jagat   Singh   Versus Kalyan Singh”, pending adjudication, before the Court of learned   Civil   Judge,   Shillai,   District   Sirmour,   H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned trial Court’). 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the present  lis,  are,   hereinafter   referred   to,   in   the   same manner, as were, referred to, by the learned trial Court. 3. Plaintiff   Jagat   Singh   has   filed   a   suit   for permanent   prohibitory   injunction,   restraining   the 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:33180 defendant   from   digging,   laying   foundation,   interfering, taking   forcible   possession   over   the   land   bearing   Khata Khatauni   No.   7min/12min,   Khasra   No.   5505/849,   total measuring 19­14 bighas, situated at Mauza Shillai, Tehsil Shillai, District Sirmour, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the suit land’). 4. The said suit was contested by the defendant. Consequently,   on   24.09.2022,   issues   were   framed   and thereafter, the matter was fixed for PWs. 5. As per the zimni orders, plaintiff appeared in the   witness   box   as   PW­1,   on   17.10.2023,   and   his examination­in­chief   has   been   recorded.     On   that   day, learned counsel for the defendant, sought time for cross­ examination, on the ground that the copy of the affidavit has been supplied to him, on that day only.  As such, the matter was adjourned. 6. Thereafter,   on   28.02.2024,   the   defendant counsel further sought time to cross­examine the plaintiff. Similar   request   has   been   made   on   23.08.2025, 30.10.2025.  On 30.10.2025, last opportunity was granted to the plaintiff to adduce his evidence. 3 2026:HHC:33180 7. Thereafter, on 08.05.2026, when the case was listed for cross­examination of the plaintiff, on that day, on account   of   ailment   of   the   counsel   representing   the defendant,   adjournment   has   been   sought.     However, learned trial Court has closed the opportunity to cross­ examine the plaintiff. 8. The  said   order  has  been   assailed  before  this Court. 9. As   per   the   zimni   orders,   although   sufficient opportunities have been taken by the defendant to cross­ examine the plaintiff, as well as, the other witnesses, but considering the fact that on 08.05.2026, when a request qua the ailment of the learned counsel representing the defendant was made, it was expected from the learned trial Court, to consider the said fact in sympathetic manner. 10. Considering   the   said   fact,   order   dated 08.05.2026, by virtue of which, the opportunity to cross­ examine the plaintiff, was closed by the order of the Court, is   liable  to   be   set  aside.     Consequently,   the  petition  is allowed and order dated 08.05.2026, passed by the learned trial  Court is set aside.   The defendant is permitted to 4 2026:HHC:33180 cross­examine the plaintiff, as well as, the other witnesses, subject to cost of Rs. 2,500/­, to be paid to the plaintiff. 11. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand(s) disposed of. (Virender Singh) 07th August, 2026 Judge (Pramod Kumar)