The court emphasized the importance of considering alternative methods, such as video conferencing, for witness examination in cases where physical attendance is not feasible.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.461 of 2024 Decided on: 30th September, 2024 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Onkar Nath …..Petitioner Versus Nihal Singh and another .....Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan, Advocate.

For the Respondents: None, though served.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Respondents No.1 and 2 have been duly served, however, have not attended the proceedings.

2. Petitioner’s grievance is to the order dated 08.07.2024 passed by the learned Trial Court dismissing his application under Order 26 Rule 4 read with Section

151 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) for recording the statement of Sh. Suhru Ram S/o Sh. Ram Ditt, retired Kanungo Settlement, cited as plaintiff’s witness.

3. The petitioner had moved the application under Order 26 Rule 4 read with Section 151 CPC for recording the statement of aforesaid witness through local

Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes

commissioner on the ground that the witness was in his advanced age and suffering from several ailments. That he was unable to travel & walk and was bed-ridden. Learned Trial Court on considering the medical record of the aforesaid witness, inter-alia, observed that from the medical slips, it could be presumed about the aforesaid witness visiting hospital at distant place from his place of residence and hence, it cannot be presumed that he was unable to attend the Court. The application was accordingly dismissed.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. The aforesaid witness-Sh. Suhru Ram is stated to be 75 years old and suffering from acute diabetes &

certain other ailments. Be that as it may.

From the impugned order, it appears that the learned Trial Court was inter-alia influenced by the fact that it had offered to record the statement of the aforesaid witness through video conferencing by electronic mode, but the same was not opted by the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner disputes the above factual observation made in the impugned order. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to get the statement of his aforesaid witness-

Sh. Suhru Ram recorded through video conferencing. If that is so, then it is for the learned Trial Court to consider the matter afresh.

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to move fresh application for the examination of his aforesaid witness-Sh. Suhru Ram through video conferencing on the next date of listing of the case, i.e. 04.11.2024. Appropriate order in accordance with law shall be passed thereupon by the learned Trial Court. It is made clear that the impugned order dated 08.07.2024 shall not come in the way of the learned Trial Court in considering the prayer of the petitioner for examination of his aforesaid witness through video conferencing.

With the aforesaid observations, the present petition is disposed of alongwith pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua September 30, 2024 Judge Mukesh