MOHAN SINGH Vs. RAMPAL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT revision petition is directed against the order dated 14.8.2013, passed by Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Hoshiarpur, whereby cross -examination of DW3 has been treated as Nil. Learned counsel has assailed the order. According to him, a perusal of Zimni orders, reproduced in para 4 of the petition, would show that on number of dates no DW was present. The case was also adjourned on request of counsel for defendants. On 14.8.2013, DW3 namely, Bal Kishan Sharma was present in court. Plaintiff also appeared. As counsel for plaintiff was busy in another court, trial court decided to treat cross -examination of DW3 as Nil. According to him, the order is unsustainable and deserves to be set -aside.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and given careful thought to the facts of the case. It appears that a suit for permanent injunction was filed by the plaintiff to restrain defendants from forcibly dispossessing the plaintiff and his family members from the property as described in the plaint. It appears, during the proceedings on number of dates, no DW appeared. Case was adjourned number of times on request of counsel for defendants. On 14.8.2013, DW3 Bal Kishan was present in court. Plaintiff had also put in appearance. However, court came to the conclusion that despite opportunity plaintiff had failed to cross -examine the witness and thus, treated his cross -examination as Nil. I find, the order is rather harsh and deserves to be set -aside. One opportunity requires to be afforded to the plaintiff's counsel to cross -examine DW3. The impugned order is, thus, set aside and revision petition is allowed. This order is being passed without issuance of notice to the respondents as this court is not entering into merits of the case. In case, however, respondents are aggrieved by this order, they shall be entitled to move appropriate application.