Decided Sunil Dhawan And Others Sunil Dhawan And Others v. And Another Anil Dhawan And Another
Case Details
2025 (O&M) CR-7503-2025 (O&M) -1- OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH -.- CR CR-7503-2025 (O&M) Decided on:-28.10.2025 Decided Sunil Dhawan And Others Sunil Dhawan And Others ....Petitioners VERSUS And Another Anil Dhawan And Another ....Respondents MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU CORAM : HON'BLE M Present: Mr. R.S.Bajaj
Legal Reasoning
Mr. R.S.Bajaj, Advocate for the petitioner , Advocate for the petitioners. -.- MANDEEP PANNU J. MANDEEP PANNU 1. Present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the for setting aside the order dated 30.09.2025 passed by the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 30.09.2025 passed by the for setting aside the order dated 30.09.2025 passed by the Constitution of India learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar, whereby the evidence of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar, whereby the evidence of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar, whereby the evidence of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar, whereby the evidence of the defendants was ordered to be closed by court order. petitioners–defendants was ordered to be closed by court order. defendants was ordered to be closed by court order. Brief Facts 2. adjudication of the present petition are The brief facts necessary for adjudication of the present petition are adjudication of the present petition are The brief facts necessary for plaintiff filed a suit for partition by metes and bounds of all the that the respondent–plaintiff filed a suit for partition by metes and bounds of all the plaintiff filed a suit for partition by metes and bounds of all the that the respondent immovable properties left behind by the father of petitioner No.1, claiming one- immovable properties left behind by the father of petitioner No.1, claiming one immovable properties left behind by the father of petitioner No.1, claiming one immovable properties left behind by the father of petitioner No.1, claiming one ef of permanent injunction third share each, along with consequential relief of permanent injunction third share each, along with consequential reli third share each, along with consequential reli restraining the defendants from selling, mortgaging, alienating or creating any restraining the defendants from selling, mortgaging, alienating or creating any restraining the defendants from selling, mortgaging, alienating or creating any restraining the defendants from selling, mortgaging, alienating or creating any charge beyond their respective shares. A further declaration was sought to the charge beyond their respective shares. A further declaration was sought to the charge beyond their respective shares. A further declaration was sought to the charge beyond their respective shares. A further declaration was sought to the petitioner effect that the transfer deed executed by petitioner No.1 in favour of petitioner effect that the transfer deed executed by petitioner No.1 in favour of effect that the transfer deed executed by petitioner No.1 in favour of No.3 is illegal, void and not binding on the rights of the plaintiff. No.3 is illegal, void and not binding on the rights of the plaintiff. No.3 is illegal, void and not binding on the rights of the plaintiff. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2025 (O&M) CR-7503-2025 (O&M) -2- 3. defendants filed their written statement contesting the The petitioners–defendants filed their written statement contesting the defendants filed their written statement contesting the The petitioners claim and subsequently filed a written statement to the amended plaint also. After claim and subsequently filed a written statement to the amended plaint also. After claim and subsequently filed a written statement to the amended plaint also. After claim and subsequently filed a written statement to the amended plaint also. After framing of issues, the case was fixed for plaintiff’s evidence. framing of issu The plaintiff’s es, the case was fixed for plaintiff’s evidence. The plaintiff’s evidence commenced on 04.10.2022 and continued for more than two and a half evidence commenced on 04.10.2022 and continued for more than two and a half evidence commenced on 04.10.2022 and continued for more than two and a half evidence commenced on 04.10.2022 and continued for more than two and a half years. Ultimately, as the plaintiff failed to conclude the same, his evidence was years. Ultimately, as the plaintiff failed to conclude the same, his evidence was years. Ultimately, as the plaintiff failed to conclude the same, his evidence was years. Ultimately, as the plaintiff failed to conclude the same, his evidence was and the case was adjourned for defendants’ closed by order dated 04.04.2025, and the case was adjourned for defendants’ and the case was adjourned for defendants’ closed by order dated 04.04.2025, During the course of their evidence, the defendants examined certain evidence. During the course of their evidence, the defendants examined certain During the course of their evidence, the defendants examined certain During the course of their evidence, the defendants examined certain witnesses, including DW2 Inderjit Singh, Chartered Accountant of M/s Inderjit witnesses, including DW2 Inderjit Singh, Chartered Accountant of M/s Inderjit witnesses, including DW2 Inderjit Singh, Chartered Accountant of M/s Inderjit witnesses, including DW2 Inderjit Singh, Chartered Accountant of M/s Inderjit he HRC Branch. Though Singh & Associates, and DW Jatinder Singh, Clerk from the HRC Branch. Though Singh & Associates, and DW Jatinder Singh, Clerk from t Singh & Associates, and DW Jatinder Singh, Clerk from t DW Jatinder Singh appeared on 23.07.2025, he could not be examined for want of DW Jatinder Singh appeared on 23.07.2025, he could not be examined for want of DW Jatinder Singh appeared on 23.07.2025, he could not be examined for want of DW Jatinder Singh appeared on 23.07.2025, he could not be examined for want of record and was bound down for the next date, i.e. 06.08.2025. However, on that record and was bound down for the next date, i.e. 06.08.2025. However, on that record and was bound down for the next date, i.e. 06.08.2025. However, on that record and was bound down for the next date, i.e. 06.08.2025. However, on that date, he did not appear, and hence, bailable warrants were issued against him. date, he did not appear, and hence, bailable warrants were issued against hi date, he did not appear, and hence, bailable warrants were issued against hi date, he did not appear, and hence, bailable warrants were issued against hi chief, but his cross- DW2 Inderjit Singh, who was present, was examined-in-chief, but his cross DW2 Inderjit Singh, who was present, was examined DW2 Inderjit Singh, who was present, was examined On subsequent examination was deferred on the request of counsel for the plaintiff. On subsequent examination was deferred on the request of counsel for the plaintiff. examination was deferred on the request of counsel for the plaintiff. dates, petitioner No.1 and his paternal aunt Smt. Kiran Rani also appeared and dates, petitioner No.1 and his paternal aunt Smt. Kiran Rani also appeared and dates, petitioner No.1 and his paternal aunt Smt. Kiran Rani also appeared and dates, petitioner No.1 and his paternal aunt Smt. Kiran Rani also appeared and were examined in chief on 05.09.2025. Their cross were examined in examination was deferred on chief on 05.09.2025. Their cross-examination was deferred on Unfortunately, on the plaintiff’s request and the case was adjourned to 16.09.2025. Unfortunately, on the plaintiff’s request and the case was adjourned to 16.09.2025. the plaintiff’s request and the case was adjourned to 16.09.2025. 11.09.2025, petitioner No.1 suffered a brain stroke and was admitted in NHS 11.09.2025, petitioner No.1 suffered a brain stroke and was admitted in NHS 11.09.2025, petitioner No.1 suffered a brain stroke and was admitted in NHS 11.09.2025, petitioner No.1 suffered a brain stroke and was admitted in NHS remained under treatment till 16.09.2025. Due Hospital, Jalandhar City, where he remained under treatment till 16.09.2025. Due remained under treatment till 16.09.2025. Due Hospital, Jalandhar to his serious medical condition and hospitalization, neither petitioner No.1 nor his to his serious medical condition and hospitalization, neither petitioner No.1 nor his to his serious medical condition and hospitalization, neither petitioner No.1 nor his to his serious medical condition and hospitalization, neither petitioner No.1 nor his examination on that date. An application seeking aunt could appear for cross-examination on that date. An application seeking examination on that date. An application seeking aunt could appear for cross by the learned Trial Court, and exemption from personal appearance was allowed by the learned Trial Court, and exemption from personal appearance was allowed exemption from personal appearance was allowed Despite the genuine illness of petitioner the matter was adjourned to 30.09.2025. Despite the genuine illness of petitioner Despite the genuine illness of petitioner the matter was adjourned to 30.09.2025. No.1, as supported by medical records and prescription slips (Annexures P-2, P No.1, as supported by medical records and prescription slips (Annexures P No.1, as supported by medical records and prescription slips (Annexures P 2, P-5, TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2025 (O&M) CR-7503-2025 (O&M) -3- iating the medical 11), the learned trial Court, without properly appreciating the medical 11), the learned trial Court, without properly apprec and P-11), the learned trial Court, without properly apprec condition and the circumstances beyond the control of the petitioners, closed the condition and the circumstances beyond the control of the petitioners, closed the condition and the circumstances beyond the control of the petitioners, closed the condition and the circumstances beyond the control of the petitioners, closed the defendants’ evidence by order dated 30.09.2025 (Annexure P-13). defendants’ evidence by order dated 30.09.2025 (Annexure P defendants’ evidence by order dated 30.09.2025 (Annexure P Submissions of Counsel for the Petitioners Submissions of Counsel for the Petitioners 4. that there was no Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there was no Learned counsel for the petitioners submits Learned counsel for the petitioners submits intentional or deliberate default on the part of the petitioners in not concluding intentional or deliberate default on the part of the petitioners in not concluding intentional or deliberate default on the part of the petitioners in not concluding intentional or deliberate default on the part of the petitioners in not concluding their evidence. The absence of petitioner No.1 and his witness was caused purely their evidence. The absence of petitioner No.1 and his witness was caused purely their evidence. The absence of petitioner No.1 and his witness was caused purely their evidence. The absence of petitioner No.1 and his witness was caused purely by unavoidable medical circumstances. It is further contended that DW2 Ind by unavoidable medical circumstances. erjit It is further contended that DW2 Inderjit Singh is a summoned witness who has already been examined in chief, and his Singh is a summoned witness who has already been examined in chief, and his Singh is a summoned witness who has already been examined in chief, and his Singh is a summoned witness who has already been examined in chief, and his examination remains pending only due to the plaintiff’s adjournments. cross-examination remains pending only due to the plaintiff’s adjournments. examination remains pending only due to the plaintiff’s adjournments. examination remains pending only due to the plaintiff’s adjournments. appearance or default of Therefore, the petitioners cannot be penalized for the non-appearance or default of Therefore, the petitioners cannot be penalized for the non Therefore, the petitioners cannot be penalized for the non ness. The learned trial Court has passed the impugned order a summoned witness. The learned trial Court has passed the impugned order ness. The learned trial Court has passed the impugned order a summoned wit mechanically, without due consideration of the medical record and without mechanically, without due consideration of the medical record and without mechanically, without due consideration of the medical record and without mechanically, without due consideration of the medical record and without balancing the cause of justice with procedural discipline. balancing the cause of justice with procedural discipline. balancing the cause of justice with procedural discipline. 5. tage in view of Notice in the matter is not required to be issued at this stage in view of Notice in the matter is not required Notice in the matter is not required the nature of the relief sought. the nature of the relief sought Findings of this Court Findings of this Court 6. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the record, this Court is of the considered opinion that though the defendants were record, this Court is of the considered opinion that though the defendants were record, this Court is of the considered opinion that though the defendants were record, this Court is of the considered opinion that though the defendants were lead evidence, the circumstances prevailing in granted several opportunities to lead evidence, the circumstances prevailing in lead evidence, the circumstances prevailing in granted several opportunities to September 2025 were exceptional and beyond their control. September 2025 were exceptional and beyond their control. September 2025 were exceptional and beyond their control. 7. The medical prescription and hospitalization record clearly indicate The medical prescription and hospitalization record clearly indicate The medical prescription and hospitalization record clearly indicate The medical prescription and hospitalization record clearly indicate ered that petitioner No.1 suffered a brain stroke and partial paralysis, which rendered that petitioner No.1 suffered a brain stroke and partial paralysis, which rend that petitioner No.1 suffered a brain stroke and partial paralysis, which rend TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2025 (O&M) CR-7503-2025 (O&M) -4- him medically unfit to appear in Court or coordinate with his counsel for the him medically unfit to appear in Court or coordinate with his counsel for the him medically unfit to appear in Court or coordinate with his counsel for the him medically unfit to appear in Court or coordinate with his counsel for the preparation and completion of evidence. preparation and completion of evidence. 8. settled principle that procedural laws are handmaid of It is a well-settled principle that procedural laws are handmaid of settled principle that procedural laws are handmaid of It is a well hts when the cause justice, and technicalities should not defeat substantive rights when the cause justice, and technicalities should not defeat substantive rig justice, and technicalities should not defeat substantive rig shown is bona fide and duly substantiated by medical evidence. The object of the shown is bona fide and duly substantiated by medical evidence. The object of the shown is bona fide and duly substantiated by medical evidence. The object of the shown is bona fide and duly substantiated by medical evidence. The object of the Court should be to advance justice rather than to thwart it on mere procedural Court should be to advance justice rather than to thwart it on mere procedural Court should be to advance justice rather than to thwart it on mere procedural Court should be to advance justice rather than to thwart it on mere procedural grounds. 9. The order dated 30.09.2025 does not reflect any conscious The order dated 30.09.2025 does not reflect any conscious The order dated 30.09.2025 does not reflect any conscious The order dated 30.09.2025 does not reflect any conscious eration of the medical documents placed on record. The learned trial Court consideration of the medical documents placed on record. The learned trial Court eration of the medical documents placed on record. The learned trial Court eration of the medical documents placed on record. The learned trial Court has passed the impugned order in a mechanical manner, resulting in prejudice to has passed the impugned order in a mechanical manner, resulting in prejudice to has passed the impugned order in a mechanical manner, resulting in prejudice to has passed the impugned order in a mechanical manner, resulting in prejudice to the petitioners who have yet to complete their evidence. the petitioners who have yet to complete their evidence. the petitioners who have yet to complete their evidence. 10. Even otherwise, the cross-examination o Even otherwise, the cross f DW2 and DW3 remains examination of DW2 and DW3 remains pending at the instance of the plaintiff’s counsel, and therefore, the burden of such pending at the instance of the plaintiff’s counsel, and therefore, the burden of such pending at the instance of the plaintiff’s counsel, and therefore, the burden of such pending at the instance of the plaintiff’s counsel, and therefore, the burden of such delay cannot be placed upon the defendants. delay cannot be placed upon the defendants. 11. In these circumstances, this Court finds it just and proper to grant the In these circumstances, this Court finds it just and proper to grant the In these circumstances, this Court finds it just and proper to grant the In these circumstances, this Court finds it just and proper to grant the unity to complete their evidence, while at the same time petitioners a final opportunity to complete their evidence, while at the same time unity to complete their evidence, while at the same time petitioners a final opport imposing reasonable costs to compensate the other side for the delay. imposing reasonable costs to compensate the other side for the delay. imposing reasonable costs to compensate the other side for the delay. Conclusion 12. The impugned Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed. The impugned Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed. Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed. Civil Judge (Junior Division), order dated 30.09.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), order dated 30.09.2025 passed by the learned order dated 30.09.2025 passed by the learned The learned trial Court is directed to grant two effective Jalandhar is set aside. The learned trial Court is directed to grant two effective The learned trial Court is directed to grant two effective Jalandhar is set aside. defendants to conclude their entire evidence, opportunities to the petitioners–defendants to conclude their entire evidence, defendants to conclude their entire evidence, opportunities to the petitioners including the cross-examination of the witnesses already examin including the cross ed, subject to examination of the witnesses already examined, subject to TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2025 (O&M) CR-7503-2025 (O&M) -5- payment of ₹3,000/ ₹3,000/- as costs to the respondent– plaintiff on or before the next date –plaintiff on or before the next date fixed before the trial Court. fixed before the trial Court. 13. It is, however, made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted It is, however, made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted It is, however, made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted It is, however, made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted failing which the trial Court shall to the petitioners beyond these two opportunities, failing which the trial Court shall to the petitioners beyond these two opportunities, to the petitioners beyond these two opportunities, be at liberty to close their evidence by order. be at liberty to close their evidence by order. 14. 15. The revision petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. The revision petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. The revision petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. The revision petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms.
Decision
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. October 28, 2025 tripti 2025 (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE Whether speaking/non Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable Whether reportable TRIPTI SAINI 2025.10.28 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document