GAJINDER SINGH Vs. RAVINDER KUMAR SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Application is allowed. Annexure A to H are taken on record.

(2.) The petitioner has filed the instant revision petition with a prayer that he be permitted to be cross-examined which has been declined by the trial court as his evidence has been closed on 26.9.2009. Four witnesses of the petitioner before the trial court were examined and the matter was adjourned for 23.5.2008 for his cross-examination. The matter was thereafter adjourned repeatedly and during the course of proceedings the petitioner moved an application that he cannot attend the court because of his illness, which prayer was declined and the matter was adjourned vide order dated 26.8.2009 till 29.9.2009 for cross-examination of the petitioner on which date also the petitioner did not present himself which resulted in the order of closing the evidence of the petitioner and the matter was fixed for recording of the evidence of the respondent. This is the cause of grievance of the petitioner who has contended that since he is old and ailing, he cannot attend the court proceedings and prays that his power of attorney, who is his son, be permitted to be cross-examined in his place. The prayer has been opposed by the learned Counsel for the respondent who has referred to the order dated 26.8.2009 in which in para No. 4 it has been noticed that the petitioner has been attending court proceedings in other matters on 7.1.2009, 10.6.2009 and 15.9.2009. It is thus contended that this belies the assertion of the petitioner that he is old and ailing and that it is only an attempt to evade the cross-examination and it had been contended that the son of the petitioner, who is power of attorney holder of the petitioner, cannot be examined, once the examination-in-chief has been tendered by way of an affidavit by the petitioner.

(3.) After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that no illegality has been committed by the trial court in closing the evidence of the petitioner who failed to establish his bona fides regarding his illness and consequent failure to appear before the trial court for rendering himself for cross-examination. However, keeping in view purely the interest of justice, the impugned order is set aside subject to payment of Rs. 10,000/- as costs and it is directed that the petitioner shall be granted only one effective opportunity to be cross-examined. As the petitioner has produced some material to show that he is not well, in such an eventuality the trial court shall ensure that the petitioner is cross-examined in the early hours of the day i.e. at 10 a.m. by making proper arrangements of sitting and also ensuring that a doctor is present to take care of the medical situation which the petitioner may be confronted with.