Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. RANBIR KAUR & ORS. versus SMT. BACHAN KAUR & ORS.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Ranbir Kaur & Ors. v. Smt. Bachan Kaur & Ors. - CR-2995-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 3242 (17 May 2006)

Civil Revision No.2995 of 2006 -: 1 :-

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Revision No.2995 of 2006

Date of decision: May 25, 2006.

Smt. Ranbir Kaur & Ors.

...Petitioner(s)

v.

Smt. Bachan Kaur & Ors.

...Respondent(s)

Present: Shri Surinder Singh Siao, Advocate for the petitioners.

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

This revision petition is directed against the order dated 7th April, 2006 whereby in the civil Suit No.211-T/7.2.2004/5.11.2004 (Smt.

Ranbir Kaur & Ors v. Smt. Bachan Kaur & Ors.), the petitioner- plaintiffs' evidence has been closed by order after observing that despite three effective opportunities given to her, she failed to produce any evidence.

In view of the nature of the order which I propose to pass, since no prejudice is likely to be caused to the respondents, I am not inclined to issue notice of motion.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that there are two cross civil suits one filed by the petitioners and the other by the respondents and both these suits have been clubbed by the trial court.

However, by closing the petitioners' evidence by order, not only her valuable right to lead evidence has been taken away, her application for the Civil Revision No.2995 of 2006 -: 2 :-

secondary evidence which was fixed on 7.4.2006 also stands impliedly rejected. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners may be given not more than two opportunities to lead and conclude their entire evidence.

It is also pointed out that the case is now fixed before the trial court on 2.6.2006.

After hearing Learned Counsel for the petitioners, and having regard to the undertaking given by Learned Counsel for the petitioners, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the trial court to permit the petitioners to lead their evidence evidence by giving them two more opportunities, including one opportunity on the date already fixed, i.e., 2.6.2006. However, no further opportunity shall be granted.

This order, however, shall not preclude the trial court from deciding the application moved by the petitioners for secondary evidence, on merits. The aforesaid two opportunities shall be granted to the petitioners subject to their paying Rs.2,000/- as costs to the respondents.

Disposed of.

May 25, 2006. [ Surya Kant ]

kadyan Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.