STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. AJMER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issues of closure of evidence of one party by the court and the affected party who wishes to place further evidence remaining dissatisfied have become a recurring theme, which requires to be addressed by a more detailed order so as to contain some guidelines to be followed before the Court turns down a request for further evidence.

(2.) THIS order is passed at the stage of admission itself without serving a notice on respondent under the extraordinary circumstance that the other party has not joined issues on the point raised by the party seeking for permission for adducing further evidence but it is the order of the Court that comes in the way for tendering his evidence. This procedure is again adopted under the extraordinary circumstances keeping in view the continuity of trial without having to lose time by serving notice of the application to the respondent.

(3.) THERE are several ways by which the Court will be able to rein in the party that adopts questionable practices for prolonging the trial. Imposition of costs is one such way by which the Court can effectively compensate the party, who is put to difficulties by the unjust conduct of his adversary. Posting the case to consecutive dates on a day-to-day basis may be yet another procedure that Court can think of applying to ensure a speedy disposal and set itself a time frame before when the trial of any one case could be concluded. Obtaining list of witnesses from the parties and eliciting views of the counsel for the time that if likely to be consumed may also provide an important input for managing the board.