RAMACANDRA Vs. VITHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have preferred this writ petition challenging the order permitting defendants 3 to 6 to cross-examine PW-1.

(2.) THE first respondent-Vithal is the plaintiff in O.S. No. 53/2005. He filed the suit against the petitioners and respondents 2 to 5 for a declaration that the decree passed in O.S. No. 550/1975 dated 5.1.1982 is not binding on him, he is in actual peaceful possession of tine property and therefore, he sought for the relief of injunction restraining the petitioners herein from disturbing his possession except in accordance with law.

(3.) THE trial Court relying on the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Sadhu Singh Vs Sant Narain Singh Sewadarand Others AIR 1978 Punjab & Haryana 319 held that, though the averments in the plaint and written statement do not indicate any conflict of interest between the plaintiff and defendants 3 to 6, on the ground that no hardship would be caused to defendants 1 and 2, if defendants 3 to 6 are permitted to cross-examine PW1, the application of the petitioners was rejected.