BANK OF AMERICA N A Vs. VINOD GUJRAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admit. The matter has been heard with the consent of the parties and is being disposed of finally.

(2.) Facts of the case are that inspite of service of summons upon the witness he did not appear and the Trial Court was, therefore, constrained to issue bailable warrants for appearance of the witness on 6.9.2000. The proceedings of 6.9.2000 show that the witness was out of station and consequently the warrants were not served upon him. The Court, however, was of the view that inspite of various opportunities the witness had not appeared and, consequently his cross-examination was not been conducted and his examination-in-chief would, therefore, not be read in evidence. The evidence of the defendant was also closed. Being aggrieved by this order, the present revision petition has been filed.

(3.) Counsel for the respondent states that he will have no objection if one opportunity is granted to the petitioner to summon the witness but it should be the responsibility of the petitioner to ensure service upon him. Counsel for the petitioner is agreeable that if one opportunity is granted, he will ensure that summons are duly served upon the witness on the date when the matter would be fixed by the Trial Court for recording of evidence.