' MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.--- The petitioners are the defendants of the case, in which certain witnesses were examined by the respondents; in order to cross-examine the witnesses, the petitioners moved an application for re-examining them, however, the application was rejected, vide order dated 24- 9-2008; this order when challenged in the revision has been upheld on 29-1-2009. The learned trial Court has held that "The careful perusal of the record reveals that respondents Nos.6 to 9 examined D.Ws.1 to 14 with regard to the Issues Nos.1 to 15 framed by the trial Court in the suit. The learned counsel for the respondents has specifically recorded his statement that the evidence of D.W.1 to 14 may not be read against the present petitioner. In view of his statement, now there can be no question of re-summoning, and re-cross-examining the D.Ws.1 to 14 by the petitioners, therefore, the revision petition in hand is dismissed."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that there were many other cases, which were consolidated, and thus in that context the evidence, which had been produced by the respondents, was necessary to be rebutted and it would be done through the process of cross-examination as well.
3. I am afraid, when the statement of the respondent' counsel has come on the record, the depositions of the witnesses shall not be used against the petitioners; for all intents and purposes, the said statements are non-existent as far as the petitioners' right and interest in the litigation are concerned. No case has been made out for interference in the Constitutional jurisdiction.
Dismissed.