IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CR NO.2364/2009 Date of Decision:29.4.2009. M/s Pankaj Woollen Mills ..........Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab and others ..........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present: Mr. Anil Chawla,Advocate for the petitioner. JASWANT SINGH,J(Oral). Petitioner-plaintiff has filed this Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 27.1.2009 (Annexure P/1) passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Amritsar, closing the evidence of the petitioner-plaintiff by order of the Court. Petitioner-plaintiff, vide memo dated 21.4.1995, was sanctioned Rs.4,51,200/- as investment incentive under the Package of Investment Incentives 1992, being registered as a small scale industry. However, the said amount was not disbursed. Finally,the petitioner, vide memo dated 18.6.2002 was conveyed that the aforesaid sanction has been cancelled. Aggrieved against the action of the respondents, petitioner, in the year 2005 filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief of mandatory injunction directing the defendants to disburse the said amount. On the basis of the pleadings, issues were framed on 12.8.2005 and the case was fixed for CR NO.2364/2009 2 petitioner-plaintiff's evidence on 29.11.2005. It is apparent from the pleadings that till the passing of the impugned order on 27.1.2009, i.e. a period little over three years, petitioner- plaintiff examined four witnesses, however, their cross examination could not be completed. Learned counsel submits that out of these four witnesses, two are official witnesses for whose summoning even the requisite diet money and process fee has already been deposited but due to their non-appearance on 27.1.2009, the evidence was closed by Court order. In these circumstances, one last opportunity to complete the entire evidence of the petitioner-plaintiff, at its own responsibility and subject to payment of costs, is prayed for. A perusal of the zimni orders reveals that although sufficient opportunities have been granted to the petitioner-plaintiff, however, the cross examination of the witnesses was deferred at the request of the defendants. Be that as it may, it is quite settled that rules of procedure are handmaid of justice to advance the same and not to subvert it. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, perusing the zimni orders available on the paper book, and keeping in view the settled proposition of law in my considered opinion, it would be just and expedient to grant one last opportunity to the petitioner-plaintiff to conclude its entire evidence subject to payment of costs. For the reasons stated above, present revision petition is allowed, impugned orders dated 27.1.2009 (Annexure P/1) is set aside and petitioner- plaintiff is granted one effective opportunity, at its own responsibility to CR NO.2364/2009 3 conclude its entire evidence on the next date of hearing or on a date to be fixed by the learned Trial Court, subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- as costs, to be deposited with the State Legal Services Authority,Punjab, Chandigarh. This revision petition is being disposed of without issuing notice to the respondent-State so as to avoid further delay and costs to them. 29.4.2009. (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge