IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. ORDER S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2280/2008 13.10.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Shri Raunak Singhvi , for the petitioner. Shri M.F. Beg , for the respondent. Mr. M.F. Beg has entered the caveat. On the request of the learned counsel for the parties the matter was heard for admission. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 4.12.2007 (Annexure-3) to the writ petition by which the application dated 17.7.2007 filed by the petitioner for affording an opportunity to tender in evidence the affidavit of one of the witness namely 39994.6375925926 Indrabhan Soni from their side was rejected. The case is fixed for evidence of the petitioner on 1.6.2007 on which the date neither the witness was present nor his affidavit was filed and consequently the learned trial court closed the evidence of the petitioner. On the subsequent date i.e. 17.7.2007 the petitioner moved an application that the witness was out of station in connection with some official duties and therefore neither he was present nor his affidavit could be filed. Along with the application a copy of the affidavit of the witness Indrabhan Soni was also filed. Learned trial court having taken into account the entire facts and circumstances and the fact that sufficient opportunity had been granted in the past to the petitioner dismissed the application dated 17.7.2007 by the impugned order dated 4.12.2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the past record of the petitioner could have been made the basis for the rejection of the application and what was required to be considered was whether there was sufficient cause for not having been filed the affidavit on the date fixed which was 1.6.2007. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner's evidence was started as early as the year 2004 and more than three years were taken by the petitioner for leading their evidence and the petitioner was only interested in delaying the execution of the decree. While there may be substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent, however in the facts and circumstances since the court itself allowed the time and fixed the case for evidence of the petitioner on 1.6.2007 what was required to be considered by the court was whether there was sufficient cause on the part of the petitioner for have not having produced the witness and his affidavit for cross objection on 1.06.2007. Learned court below while deciding the application has not taken into consideration the reasons mentioned in the application for non appearance of the witness on the date fixed i.e. 1.6.2007 when he was reported to be out of station having gone to Delhi for some official work and hence he could not appear before the court on the said date. In the facts and circumstances I am inclined in the interest of justice to grant one opportunity to the petitioner for producing Indrabhan Soni the witness whose affidavit has been filed on 17.07.2007 before the court for being cross examined on the said affidavit on the next date fixed which is 16.10.2008. The petitioner shall be permitted to examine the witness on payment of cost of Rs. 2,000/- to the non petitioners which shall be paid on 16.10.2008 itself. Subject to the above the writ petition as well as the stay application stand disposed of. (DALIP SINGH),J. Ramchandrkhatri,PS