IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 375 of 2018 Decided on: 19.09.2018 Kuldeep Kumar .......Petitioner.

Versus Sh. Rajinder Kumar Kapoor f …...Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹ No For the petitioner: Mr. Virender Singh Rathour, Advocate.

For the respondent: Nemo.

Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge (Oral)

Heard.

2. The complaint is that learned trial Court has closed the evidence vide impugned order dated 24.04.2018, Annexure P-4, which has resulted in H miscarriage of justice to the petitioner-plaintiff.

Learned counsel has also pointed out that only PWs Sanjeev and Kishori have to be produced for the purpose of cross-examination, because their examination-in-chief by way of afÏdavit has already been produced. Although, keeping in view, that the last and final opportunity was granted by learned trial Judge to the petitioner-plaintiff for producing them for

1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

the purpose of recording their statement in cro.ss-

examination, hence no other and further opportunity should have been granted to him yet, keeping in view that he may not condemned unheard and it is only the statement of two witnesses in their cross-examination is left to be recorded, taking a lenient view of the matter only one opporttunity is ordered to be granted to the petitioner-plaintiff to examine the witnesses namely, Sanjeev and Kishori on a date left to be fixed by learned trial Judge subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as costs, payable to the respondent-defendant Rajinder Kumar Kapoor on the next date in the trial Court. In case, the petitioner-plaintiff has failed to produce them on the date to be so fixed, the plaintiff’s evidence shall stand closed automatically without further reference of the matter to the Court .

3. According to Mr. Rathore, learned counsel, the next date fixed in the matter most probably is 24.09.2018. Therefore, learned trial Judge to fix the date for recording the statements of above-said two witnesses on that day.

4. In view of the above, the impugned orde.r is quashed and set aside and the petition is disposed of with the above observations. Application, CMP No.

9127 of 2018 also stands disposed of.

An authenticated copy of this judgment be sent to learned trial Court through fax, whereas, hard copy by post for compliatnce.

(Dharam Chand Chaudhary)

Judge September o19, 2018 (naveen)