Civil Revision No.2653 of 2009 [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ... Civil Revision No.2653 of 2009 (O&M) Decided on : May 11, 2009 Samey Singh and another ... Petitioners VERSUS Vijay Kumar and others ... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Ajit Malik, Advocate for the petitioners. A.N.JINDAL, J.- Heard. No additional evidence has been sought to be produced by the petitioners – plaintiffs (herein referred as the `petitioners') but they want to tender the following documents in evidence:- (i)Judgment and decree dated 27.10.1990 passed in Civil Suit No.731 of 1990; (ii)Judgment and decree dated 7.8.1993 passed in Civil Suit No.537 of 1993; (iii)Sale deed No.223 dated 27.4.2001, and (iv)Special Power of Attorney dated 27.4.2001. Civil Revision No.2653 of 2009 [ 2 ] The Trial Court appears to have dismissed the application vide the impugned order dated 14.3.2009, on the assumption that the petitioners had moved an application for additional evidence. Any way, keeping in view the fact that the above referred documentary evidence is sought to be produced which may not contribute any delay and may be essential for just decision of the case, this petition is allowed and it is directed that the Trial Court would grant only one effective opportunity to the petitioners to produce the aforesaid evidence, subject to their admissibility and also on payment of Rs.500/- as costs. This petition is disposed of without issuing notice to the respondents with a view to impart complete justice to the parties and to save the huge expenses, which may be incurred by the respondents as also in order to avoid unnecessary delay in adjudication of the matter. Still, if dissatisfied, the respondents may move this court for recalling this order. May 11, 2009 ( A.N.JINDAL ) `gian' JUDGE