L.N. Mittal - (1.) CM No. 11128.CII of 2012 Allowed as prayed for. CR No. 2613 of 2012 Plaintiff Harbans Singh has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to assail two orders, both dated 27.3.2012, Annexures P/3 and P/4, passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana thereby treating remaining cross-examination of DW1 Harbilas Singh defendant-respondent no. 1 as nil. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner prayed that only one opportunity be granted to the plaintiff for remaining cross-examination of Harbilas DW1. I have carefully considered the aforesaid prayer. Perusal of impugned order Annexure P/3 reveals that plaintiff was present in person and DW1 was also present. However, plaintiff's counsel did not turn up to cross-examine the said witness. The trial court waited for the plaintiff's counsel till 12.55 PM i.e. till just before lunch time. Then the case was ordered to be put up after lunch break vide order Annexure P/3. The case was again taken up after lunch break but the counsel repeated the same thing. He was awaited till 3.55 PM when order Annexure P/4 was passed treating remaining cross-examination of Harbilas Singh DW1 as nil. COUNSEL for the petitioner submitted that the Advocate representing plaintiff ? petitioner in the trial court was contesting election of Bar Association which was to be held on 4.4.2012 and was, therefore, busy in some Committee of Bar Association. However, if it was so, request should have been made in the early hours of the day for adjournment. Trial court could not be asked to wait for the counsel for the whole day without any fruitful result. No such request that the counsel was busy in election or committee was even made at any stage to the trial court when impugned orders were passed.
(3.) HAVING said as aforesaid, I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be met if plaintiff-petitioner is granted another opportunity for cross-examination of the aforesaid witness on payment of heavy costs. Counsel for the petitioner is not sure whether the suit is still pending or has been finally disposed of.;