SHIVRAJ SINGH Vs. RAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CONCISELY , the facts & material, which need a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant revision petition and emanating from the record are that initially, the respondent -plaintiff Raju son of Chuhar Ram (for brevity "the plaintiff"), has instituted the civil suit for recovery, against the petitionerdefendant Shivraj son of Pritam Singh (for short "the defendant").

(2.) HAVING framed the issues, arising out of the pleadings of the parties, ultimately, the trial Court slated the case for evidence of the plaintiff on 06.12.2013. On that date, PWs Raju and Parkasho were present in the Court. According to the petitioner -defendant, they could not be crossexamined, on account of serious illness of the mother of his counsel and his illness as well. Consequently, the trial Court nullified the right of his cross examination, vide impugned order dated 06.12.2013.

(3.) FACED with the situation, the defendant moved an application for permission to cross examine PWs Raju and Parkasho, inter alia, pleading that he could not cross examine the witnesses on 06.12.2013, as the mother of his counsel was seriously ill. The witnesses could not also be cross examined on 12.12.2013, on account of illness of his counsel as well. On the strength of aforesaid grounds, the defendant sought permission to cross examine the pointed witnesses. The plaintiff did not file any reply to refute the prayer of the defendant. However, the trial Court dismissed the application, by way of impugned order dated 09.01.2014.