IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 3198 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 28.5.2009 M/s Ajay Trading Co. Jind ....Petitioner Versus M/s Satish Agricultural Store ...Respondent CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. U.K. Agnihotri, Advocate for the petitioner. RAJESH BINDAL J **** The challenge in the present petition is to the order dated April 28, 2009 passed by learned Court below whereby the application under Order 18 Rule17A CPC for leading additional evidence field by the petitioner/plaintiff was dismissed. The evidence of the petitioner was closed on May 23, 2008 by order of the Court as the petitioner failed to appear for his cross-examination, even though he had filed his affidavit in evidence. Thereafter the evidence of defendant started. After one DW had been examined on January 29, 2009, application was filed by the petitioner for leading additional evidence in the form of his cross examination which was earlier left and on account of which the evidence of petitioner was closed. Learned Court below did not find that the facts of the present case justified, grant of an opportunity to the petitioner to lead additional evidence. As the party who had furnished his affidavit on evidence and had not produced himself for cross examination, he cannot seek permission to lead additional evidence in the form of his cross-examination only. Another fact which is noticed by learned Court below is that on May 23, 2008 when his evidence was closed, the petitioner failed to appear inspite of imposition of costs of Rs. 1000/-. No certificate from any Medical Officer showing his illness on the relevant date was produced on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in case one opportunity is granted to the petitioner to get himself cross-examined, he will present himself on the date fixed by learned Court below. However, I do not find this to be a fit case in which one opportunity can be granted as it is not a simple case where the party is impugning an order closing his evidence. After the closer of evidence of petitioner even evidence of the defendant started and application for leading additional evidence was filed about eight months after the passing of order, where no ground was made out for permitting leading of additional evidence. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed. (RAJESH BINDAL) 28.5.2009 JUDGE Reema