Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. and Others vs Bansal Rice Mills and Others

Virender Singh, J.—Since it is a short matter, I do not feel the necessity to issue notice to the respondents.

Petitioners are plaintiffs in this case. It is suit for recovery of Rs. 5,06,64,092 filed by the petitioners against the respondent. The evidence of the petitioners was closed vide order dated 9.5.2003 by the order of the Court. Petitioners thereafter filed a revision petition No. 3086 of 2003 in his Court against the said order. While disposing the said revision, this Court on 8.7.2003 passed the following order:-

"Present Mr. H.S.Gill, Advocate

Counsel for the petitioners submits that as per order dated 9.5.2003 it has been observed that Munsha Singh PW was present though he had not produced the record. On this ground, adjournment was sought. Learned counsel submits that the plaintiffs will produce Munsha Singh alongwith record on the next date i.e. 25.7.2003, but the trial court has closed the evidence.

the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, it is directed that if the plaintiff produce Munsha Singh alongwith record on the date already fixed, the trial court will take evidence of the said witness. Petition stands disposed of accordingly."

Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that on 27.7.2003, the date already fixed before the Trial Court, Munsha Singh could not be produced due to shortage of time and consequently vide impugned order dated 25.7.2003, the evidence of the petitioners was closed. However, the impugned order does not reflect the proper application of mind. The learned trial court has said that the defendant/respondent had filed a revision before this Court and consequently defendant''s evidence was closed. In fact it should have been plaintiff''s evidence.

It has been brought to my notice by the learned counsel for the petitioners mat the next date before the trial court is somewhere in third week of November, 2003 but the learned counsel is not sure of the exact date and till date no evidence from the side of the defendant has been led.

Without commenting further on the order, in the interest of justice, I grant another opportunity to the petitioners to produce Munsha Singh alongwith complete record on the next date subject to payment of Rs. 5000/- as costs. The petitioners would also take Dasti summons from the trial Court after filing process fee and diet money within seven days from today.

The present revision petition allowed and the impugned order dated 25,7.2003 is set aside.

Copy of the order be given Dasti on payment of usual charges.