HARNAM SINGH Vs. MANPREET SINGH BARARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of Civil Revision Petitions Nos. 1933, 1934 and 1935 of 1981, as they were ordered to be heard together.

(2.) The plaintiff-respondent, in all the above-said revision petitions, filed a suit for possession of the suit land by way of pre-emption. By the impugned order, dated May 8, 1981, the trial Court directed the defendants-petitioner to take dasti summons for service on their witnesses. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the trial Court could not make the order directing them to take dasti summons, as they were under no duty to take the same when they had complied with the orders of the trial Court by depositing the process-fee and the diet money, within time. In support of this contention, the learned counsel relied upon Har Singh v. Krishan Gopal, 1976 CurLJ 431 and Vidya Sagar Bansal v. Lashkari Mal,1981 PunLR 65.

(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any merit in this revision petition.