UCO BANK Vs. VED PARKASH AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 28.9.2010 whereby cross-examination of PW-1, PW-3 and PW-4 was directed to be treated as nil and order dated 3.11.2010 whereby application for recalling the order dated 28.9.2010 was dismissed.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that on 28.9.2010 learned Counsel for the Petitioner-Defendant appearing before the trial Court was busy in another Court, hence, Sh. Manmohan Singh, Junior Advocate has sought time from the trial Court on the ground that his Senior Sh. Sudesh Mahajan, Advocate is busy in another Court. However, time was not granted and impugned order dated 28.9.2010 was passed. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further states that on the date either fixed by this Court or by the learned Trial Court, cross examination of PW-1, PW-3 and PW-4 shall be conducted and no further adjournment shall be sought.

(3.) Learned Single Judge of this Court in the matter of Prem Lata v. Ram Sarup, 2005(4) RCR 423 placing reliance on judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Batala Machine Tools Workshop Coop. v. Presiding Officer Labour Court Gurdaspur has held that matter can be disposed of at the stage of admission without any notice to the opposite party, because if the Respondent is summoned to contest this litigation, it may involve huge expenditure and unnecessary harassment and delay of the proceedings.