IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-588-2026 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 21.01.2026 M/S JAIN BUTTON STORE ......... Petitioner Versus M/S MILAP GENERAL STORE & ANR ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present : Ms. Shivani Jaglan, Advocate for the petitioner.

****

YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR , J. (Oral)

1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 26.11.2025 (Annexure P-9) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Panipat, vide which an application moved by the plaintiff- petitioner under Section 151 CPC for leading additional evidence has been rejected on the ground that the plaintiff had failed to lead affirmative evidence at the relevant time.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the material placed on the file.

3. By way of the application in hand, it has been pleaded that some documents which go to the root of the case could not be led in evidence inadvertently while leading evidence and now, the plaintiff wants to lead in evidence the certified copy of the cross-examination of defendant Prem Pal in another civil suit titled as M/s Milap General Store, Ambala Vs. M/s Jain Button Store, Panipat, which is pending at Ambala, the report dated 31.07.2018 issued by the Economic Cell, the statement of Deepak and Prem Pal by way of additional evidence alongwith the statement of account of his bank. It was submitted that all these documents have been produced by the defendant himself in Civil Suit No. CS-1339 of 2018 titled M/s Milap General Store, Ambala Vs. M/s Jain Button Store, Panipat. No prejudice is going to be caused to the opposite party in case, the application is allowed.

4. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff for recovery of `6,07,487/- against the defendant on account of business transaction between both the parties and in the present suit, the defendant is exparte. Said defendant Prem Pal has separately instituted one civil suit bearing No. CS-1339 of 2018 titled M/s Milap General Store, Ambala Vs. M/s Jain Button Store, Panipat, in which he has led in evidence certain documents. By way of the present application, the plaintiff-petitioner wanted to lead in evidence the statements of Deepak and Prem Pal as well as his cross-examination, bank statement and application dated 21.12.2018, and report dated 31.07.2018 issued by the Economic Cell, which have already been tendered by the said Prem Pal in the suit pending at Ambala. Learned Trial Court has dismissed the application by observing that the plaintiff has failed to lead the same while leading affirmative evidence. However, the defendant is already exparte and no issues have been framed and as such, there was no question of leading any affirmative evidence. As affirmative evidence is led by the plaintiff in respect of the issues which have been framed and the onus to prove the same is upon the plaintiff. Moreover, the documents sought to be led are essential, as the same have admittedly been led in evidence by the defendant himself in another civil suit where his statement too has been recorded which too is sought to be led in evidence. Rather, the evidence sought to be led will help the Court in arriving at a just conclusion and the application in hand, thus, could not have been rejected on mere hyper- technicalities. The impugned order is, thus, not sustainable and is liable to be set aside, and accordingly, the present petition is allowed and petitioner is allowed to lead the additional evidence sought to be led.

5. Pending misc. application (s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR)

JUDGE

21.01.2026 Ali Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No