JUDGMENT Mr. Rajan Gupta, J. (Oral):- CM-25325-CII-2013: This is an application for placing on record examination-inchief as well as cross-examination of DW5. Application is allowed subject to just exception. The documents are taken on record as Annexure P-4. CR-7685-2013: 1. Present revision petition is directed against the order dated 3.12.2013, passed by the trial court, whereby application moved by petitioners to direct DW5 (Patwari Muharrir) to prepare excerpt of jamabandi from 1883 to 2002-03 of village Balsamand, Tehsil and District Hisar as envisaged in Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and Orders Volume 1 Chapter IX, has been dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has assailed the order. According to him, Patwari did not act in accordance with law while deposing as DW5. The excerpt prepared by him is not in the prescribed mode. Thus, trial court has erred in rejecting the application. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and given careful thought to the facts of the case. 4. It appears that plaintiff/respondents filed a suit for permanent injunction to restrain defendant/petitioners from interfering in peaceful possession of the property as described in the plaint. At the stage of defendants’ evidence, an official witness i.e. Patwari Muharrir was summoned. He deposed as DW5 and proved jamabandis from the years 1883 to 2002-03. Petitioners filed an application for recalling the witness as he had not prepared the excerpt of jamabandi in accordance with High Court Rules and Orders. On issuance of notice, Patwari appeared and stated that Khatoni Kilabandi and record Istemal were not available. Besides, mutation had already been incorporated in the Jamabandi. Trial court, thus, came to the conclusion that documents as required by the defendants, had been supplied by Muharrir Patwari. I find no infirmity with the order. It is evident that the record available with the Patwari Muharrir was produced before the court. Evidentiary value of same can be evaluated at the final stage of the suit. An official witness cannot be directed to depose before the court in a particular manner. I, thus, find no ground to interfere in revisional jurisdiction. 5. Dismissed.