High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Milkh Raj vs Gurdwara Anand Bhawan on 7 August, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Milkh Raj vs Gurdwara Anand Bhawan on 7 August, 2009
Civil Rev. 2342 of 2009                     1


IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH


                                         Civil Rev. 2342 of 2009
                                         Date of decision: 7.8.2009


Milkh Raj
                                                        Petitioner
                        vs
Gurdwara Anand Bhawan, Saffuwala
                                                        Respondent


Present     Mr. VK Shukla, Advocate


M.M.S.BEDI,J.

Notice issued to the respondent has been received back

served. None has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent.

Proceeded against ex-parte

A perusal of the file indicates that vide impugned order dated

30.3.2009, the plaintiff-respondent has been permitted to produce a

certified copy of the resolution dated 1.11.2003, passed by the Gurdwara

Committee on the record. The application for production of the said

resolution was opposed on the ground that the plaintiff wanted to delay the

proceedings and that the evidence of the plaintiff-respondent stood closed.

While allowing the application, the trial court observed that the

plaintiff had specifically pleaded about the resolution dated 1.11.2003 in

paragraph 6 of the plaint and a copy of the resolution had already been

attached with the plaint. The plaintiff-respondent merely wanted to produce

the certified copy of the same.

I have carefully gone through the facts and circumstances of

this case. The suit of the plaintiff is for recovery of Rs. 1,59,020/- on the

basis of receipt-cum-undertaking dated 19.6.2002. The resolution in favour
Civil Rev. 2342 of 2009 2

of the plaintiff-respondent is not the main controversy between the parties.

In view of the fact that no prejudice will be caused to the

defendant- petitioner by permitting a certified copy of the resolution dated

1.11.2003 to be placed on record, this petition deserves to be dismissed.

No ground for interference is made out.

Dismissed.

August 7 ,2009                                     ( M.M.S.BEDI )
TSM                                                     JUDGE