In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No.3782 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 2.6.2011 Surinder Nath Suri ......petitioner Versus Joginder Nath Suri .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Ashok Sehgal, Advocate for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. Plaintiff-petitioner has filed a suit for declaration challenging the Will dated 14.4.1982, alleged to have been executed by Basheshar Dass in favour of defendant No.1. Vide the impugned order dated 19.10.2010, the evidence of the plaintiff was closed. Hence, the present petition by the plaintiff. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner could not conclude his evidence as he was residing at Jaipur and due to his ill health. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the present petition deserves to be dismissed. In the present case, the petitioner had filed a suit in the year 2004 and after completion of pleadings, issues were framed by Civil Revision No.3782 of 2011 (O&M) -2- the trial Court in the year 2007. The case was listed for the evidence of the petitioner from time to time but the petitioner failed to conclude his evidence. In these circumstances, learned trial Court had rightly closed the evidence of the plaintiff vide order dated 19.10.2010 as the petitioner had failed to conclude his evidence after the issues were framed by the trial Court in the year 2007. There is nothing on record to substantiate the plea of the petitioner that he could not lead his evidence due to his ill health. No ground for interference by this Court is made out. Dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE June 02, 2011 anita