LAWS(P&H)-2013-8-612

KRISHAN LAL Vs. RAMESH BHARDWAJ

Decided On August 12, 2013
KRISHAN LAL Appellant
V/S
Ramesh Bhardwaj Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF Krishan Lal has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning order dated 16.10.2012 (Annexure P -2) and order dated 18.07.2013 (Annexure P -5) passed by the trial court. The suit was instituted by plaintiff -petitioner on 26.03.2003 i.e. more than ten years ago. The suit was fixed for 16.10.2012 for evidence of the plaintiff including his own cross -examination as PW -1. He was present but sought adjournment stating that he was not well. The case was adjourned to 02.11.2012. However, except for his cross -examination, his remaining evidence was closed by court order dated 16.10.2012 (Annexure P -2). The case was adjourned to 02.11.2012 for cross -examination of the plaintiff. On 02.11.2012 again, the plaintiff requested for adjournment and case was adjourned to various dates for his cross -examination. He was partly cross -examined on some of the dates of hearing, whereas on other dates of hearing, he was either not present or prayed for adjournment being not well or for some other reason. On 25.03.2013, the plaintiff produced another witness as PW -2, who tendered his affidavit of examination -in -chief. However, since evidence of the plaintiff, except for his cross -examination, stood closed vide order dated 16.10.2012 (Annexure P -2), by order dated 25.03.2013, appearance of Satish Kumar (PW -2) as witness was disallowed by the trial court. Thereafter, plaintiff filed application (Annexure P -3) for review of the said order and for permitting appearance of Satish Kumar as witness for the plaintiff. Defendant, by filing reply (Annexure P -4), opposed the aforesaid application. Learned trial court, vide order dated 18.07.2013 (Annexure P -5), has dismissed the said application. Feeling aggrieved, plaintiff has filed this revision petition assailing orders dated 16.10.2012 (Annexure P -2) and 18.07.2013 (Annexure P -5).

(2.) I have heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.

(3.) I have carefully considered the matter.