In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 4632 of 2009(O&M) Date of Decision:August 18, 2009 Krishan Lal ---Petitioner versus Kuljit Singh and others ---Respondents Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA *** Present: Mr. Vijay Lath,Advocate, for the petitioner. *** SABINA J. Petitioner-Krishan Lal has filed this petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 20.7.2009 (Annexure P-1) passed by Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal-Cum- Additional Deputy Commissioner, Jalandhar whereby his evidence was closed by order. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that this petition deserves to be allowed. A perusal of the interim orders reveals that on 13.3.2009, petitioner (in the Election petition) closed his evidence and the case was adjourned to 1.4.2009 for evidence of the respondent(present petitioner). On 1.4.2009, counsel for the parties were present but the case was Civil Revision No. 4632 of 2009(O&M) -2- adjourned to 20.5.2009 for evidence of the respondent(present petitioner) as the Presiding Officer was busy in other official work (election duty). On the said date, the case was again adjourned to 1.7.2009 for evidence of the respondent(present petitioner) as the Presiding Officer was busy in official work(election duty). On 1.7.2009, there was a request for an adjournment and the case was adjourned to 13.7.2009 for evidence of the respondent (present petitioner). However, it is not evident as to who had made the request for adjournment i.e. whether it was respondent( present petitioner) or the other side. On 13.7.2009, it has been observed by the Presiding Officer that three opportunities have already been granted to the respondent (present petitioner) for leading evidence and last opportunity was granted to the respondent(present petitioner) to lead his evidence and the case was adjourned to 20.7.2009. However, from perusal of the earlier orders, it cannot be said that three effective opportunities had in fact been granted to the respondent(present petitioner). Thereafter, on the adjourned date i.e. 20.7.2009, since no body was present on behalf of the respondent (present petitioner), his evidence was closed by order with the observation that sufficient opportunities had already been granted to the respondent (present petitioner) to lead his evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since timings had been changed to 7.30 a.m. to 1.30 p.m. From normal official hours, petitioner could not appear on time and had appeared in the Court after lunch at 3.30. p.m. presuming that the case would be taken up after lunch as usual. From the facts mentioned above, it is evident that the petitioner had not been given effective opportunity to lead his evidence and ends of Civil Revision No. 4632 of 2009(O&M) -3- justice require that one more opportunity be granted to the petitioner to conclude his evidence. Other side can be compensated with costs. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 20.7.2009 (Annexure P-1) is set aside subject to payment of Rs. 2500/- as costs. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that now the case is fixed for 19.8.2009 before the Election Tribunal, Jalandhar. Petitioner is directed to deposit the costs of Rs. 2500/- on the next date fixed before the Election Tribunal, Jalandhar i.e. 19.8.2009. Thereafter, Election Tribunal shall fix the case for petitioner's evidence. Only one opportunity will be granted to the petitioner to lead his evidence at his own risk and responsibility. Thereafter, the Election Tribunal shall proceed further with the case in accordance with law. Copy of this order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the petitioner on payment of usual charges. (SABINA) JUDGE August 18, 2009 PARAMJIT