Himachal Pradesh High Court
CMPMO/377/2026 of PARFUL CHAND Vs BHEEM SINGH on 21 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.377 of 2026 Date of decision:21.07.2026 Praful Chand ...Petitioner Versus Bheem Singh ...Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, Advocate. For
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CMPMO No.377 of 2026
Date of decision:21.07.2026
Praful Chand
...Petitioner
Versus
Bheem Singh
...Respondent.
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Romesh Verma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondent : Nemo.
Romesh Verma, Judge (oral):
The instant petition is against the order as passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chamba, dated 15.06.2026, whereby the evidence of the defendant-petitioner has been ordered to be closed.
2. The brief facts which emerge in the present case are that the plaintiff-respondent has filed a suit for recovery amounting to Rs.2,40,000 against the defendant-petitioner. The said suit came to be instituted by the plaintiff on 25.11.2016.
3. The said suit was duly resisted by the present petitioner-defendant by filing the written statement on 04.03.2017.
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
4. The learned trial court framed the issues in the matter and directed the respective parties to adduce evidence in support of their contentions.
5. After the conclusion of the evidence by the plaintiff, the defendant was directed to adduce evidence in support of his contentions/ defence.
6. Admittedly, various opportunities have been granted to the defendant-petitioner for leading his evidence and the learned trial court has rightly exercised the jurisdiction by rejecting the application of the present petitioner for adjournment and by closing the evidence.
7. However, as a matter of indulgence and in the interest of justice, one last and final opportunity is ordered to be granted to the petitioner-defendant to lead/conclude his evidence, subject to the payment of cost of Rs.25,000/- to be paid to the respondent on the next date of hearing. This court has been informed that the case has been fixed by the learned trial court on 29.07.2026
8. The learned trial court is directed to afford last and final opportunity to the present petitioner to produce and conclude his evidence, subject to the payment of cost of Rs.25,000/-. In case the said cost is not paid, then the benefit of the present order shall not be applicable to the petitioner.
9. In view of observations made hereinabove, the present petition is disposed of along with pending application(s), if any.
(Romesh Verma)
Judge 21st July, 2026.
(vt)