Full Text
Translation output
A-51
% 23.09.2011
Present: Mr. V.K. Mishra, Advocate for the petitioner.
+CM No. 17913/2011(exemption) in CM(M) No. 1122/2011
*
Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.
CM(M) No. 1122/2011 and CM No. 17914/2011
Order impugned before this court is the order dated
26.08.2011 vide which the application filed by the petitioner under
Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as
'the Code') seeking review of the order dated 26.04.2011 had been dismissed.
Record shows that this is a suit for injunction; evidence has been led by both the parties; thereafter matter had been fixed for rebuttal evidence; this was vide order dated 05.03.2011; on
04.04.2011, at the request of the applicant one more opportunity had been granted to him and matter had been fixed for his rebuttal evidence for 26.04.2011; on 26.04.2011, court had noted that affidavit had not been and applicant evidence was closed. The review petition seeking a review of this order dated 26.04.2011 had been dismissed by the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that only one witness has to be examined in his rebuttal; he seeks only more opportunity for the said purpose.
Next date fixed before Trial Court is 28.09.2011. In view of the
2011:DHC:19452
% 23.09.2011
Present: Mr. V.K. Mishra, Advocate for the petitioner.
+CM No. 17913/2011(exemption) in CM(M) No. 1122/2011
*
Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.
CM(M) No. 1122/2011 and CM No. 17914/2011
Order impugned before this court is the order dated
26.08.2011 vide which the application filed by the petitioner under
Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as
'the Code') seeking review of the order dated 26.04.2011 had been dismissed.
Record shows that this is a suit for injunction; evidence has been led by both the parties; thereafter matter had been fixed for rebuttal evidence; this was vide order dated 05.03.2011; on
04.04.2011, at the request of the applicant one more opportunity had been granted to him and matter had been fixed for his rebuttal evidence for 26.04.2011; on 26.04.2011, court had noted that affidavit had not been and applicant evidence was closed. The review petition seeking a review of this order dated 26.04.2011 had been dismissed by the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that only one witness has to be examined in his rebuttal; he seeks only more opportunity for the said purpose.
Next date fixed before Trial Court is 28.09.2011. In view of the
2011:DHC:19452
averments which are substantiated from the record, the impugned order is set aside. One more last opportunity is granted to the appellant to lead his evidence in rebuttal; only one witness shall be produced for the said purpose on the next date i.e. 28.09.2011.
Copy of this order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the petitioner who undertakes to inform learned counsel for the respondent about the order so that he can be ready to cross- examine the witness of the petitioner on the said date i.e. on
28.09.2011. This order is passed subject to payment of Rs. 5,000/- as costs.
It is made clear that no further opportunity shall be granted for the above mentioned purpose. Petition is disposed of.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
SEPTEMBER 23, 2011 rb
2011:DHC:19452
Copy of this order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the petitioner who undertakes to inform learned counsel for the respondent about the order so that he can be ready to cross- examine the witness of the petitioner on the said date i.e. on
28.09.2011. This order is passed subject to payment of Rs. 5,000/- as costs.
It is made clear that no further opportunity shall be granted for the above mentioned purpose. Petition is disposed of.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
SEPTEMBER 23, 2011 rb
2011:DHC:19452
JUDGMENT