Full Text
Translation output
i.. /l t -.i
( a
A-3 o/o t4.07.20LT
Present : Mr. Sumit Kumar Khatri, Advocate for the petitioner'
None for the respondent.
The order impugned before this court is the order dated
20.01 .20Lt vide which the application filed by'the defendant under
Section L51 of the Code seeking recalling of the order dated
2g.tl2009 had been dismissed. Record shows that the issues had been framed in this case on 24.07.2008; plaintiff's evidence had been led and finally closed on 22.05.2009. Record further shows that the affidavit of the sole witness of the defendant Subhash chand Jain had been filed on24.09.2009; thereafter he was confined to bed because of sufferance of an accid.ent on 04.t2.2O09. The photographs depicting the physical status of the defendant have also been placed on record; these submissions had also been noted in the court below'
A Local Commissioner has been appointed to get the testimony of the defendant recorded. That remained unsuccessfuI' The order of
24.09.2009 shows that file had been received on transfer by the new concerned court; no DW was present and the matter had been aQjourned for final arguments for 24.tL 2009. Contention before this
Court is that the counsel for the defendant had appeared before the concerned court but since the matter Come on a transfer the file was taken up at 02:00 PM and this was not in the knowledge of the counsel for the defendant. On that date i.e. 24.LL'2009 the matter had
2011:DHC:7774
+
:
-, a been adjourned for final arguments. The prayer made in the application und.er Section 151 of the Code had sought a review of the order dated 24.LL.2009 which had been dismissed by the impugned ord.er with cost of Rs.5,000/-. It is stated that the cost has been deposited and the matter has been adjourned for final arguments and the next date fixed before the trial court is now 28.07.20LL.
Keeping in view the background which has been built up by
Iearned counsel for the petitioner which is borne out from the record and in the interest of justice, one more opportunity is granted to the defendant to complete his evidence. The affidavit of the sole witness of the defendnat along with documents is already on record. The defendant shall be present in the Court on the next date i.e.
2B.O7.zOLL for the purpose of his cross-examination. A copy of this
Order be sent to the concerned trial Court for information. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to inform the counsel for the ptaintiff also about the next date of hearing in order that the plaintiff is reqdy for cross-examination of the defendant witness.
Petition disposed of.
Copy of this order be given dasti under signature of the Court
Master.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
JULY 14,2011: a o'
-y
2011:DHC:7774
( a
A-3 o/o t4.07.20LT
Present : Mr. Sumit Kumar Khatri, Advocate for the petitioner'
None for the respondent.
The order impugned before this court is the order dated
20.01 .20Lt vide which the application filed by'the defendant under
Section L51 of the Code seeking recalling of the order dated
2g.tl2009 had been dismissed. Record shows that the issues had been framed in this case on 24.07.2008; plaintiff's evidence had been led and finally closed on 22.05.2009. Record further shows that the affidavit of the sole witness of the defendant Subhash chand Jain had been filed on24.09.2009; thereafter he was confined to bed because of sufferance of an accid.ent on 04.t2.2O09. The photographs depicting the physical status of the defendant have also been placed on record; these submissions had also been noted in the court below'
A Local Commissioner has been appointed to get the testimony of the defendant recorded. That remained unsuccessfuI' The order of
24.09.2009 shows that file had been received on transfer by the new concerned court; no DW was present and the matter had been aQjourned for final arguments for 24.tL 2009. Contention before this
Court is that the counsel for the defendant had appeared before the concerned court but since the matter Come on a transfer the file was taken up at 02:00 PM and this was not in the knowledge of the counsel for the defendant. On that date i.e. 24.LL'2009 the matter had
2011:DHC:7774
+
:
-, a been adjourned for final arguments. The prayer made in the application und.er Section 151 of the Code had sought a review of the order dated 24.LL.2009 which had been dismissed by the impugned ord.er with cost of Rs.5,000/-. It is stated that the cost has been deposited and the matter has been adjourned for final arguments and the next date fixed before the trial court is now 28.07.20LL.
Keeping in view the background which has been built up by
Iearned counsel for the petitioner which is borne out from the record and in the interest of justice, one more opportunity is granted to the defendant to complete his evidence. The affidavit of the sole witness of the defendnat along with documents is already on record. The defendant shall be present in the Court on the next date i.e.
2B.O7.zOLL for the purpose of his cross-examination. A copy of this
Order be sent to the concerned trial Court for information. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to inform the counsel for the ptaintiff also about the next date of hearing in order that the plaintiff is reqdy for cross-examination of the defendant witness.
Petition disposed of.
Copy of this order be given dasti under signature of the Court
Master.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
JULY 14,2011: a o'
-y
2011:DHC:7774
JUDGMENT