CRP 392/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. Thakuria, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dhar, learned cou nsel for the respondent. The respondent/husband in Matrimonial Suit No.5/2010, which is presently pending in the Court of the learned District Judge, Kamrup at Guwahati is challenging t he order dated 9th August, 2011 passed by the learned District Judge, Kamrup at Guwahati rejecting the prayer for adjournment for cross-examination of the plain tiff’s 2(two) witnesses including the plaintiff himself. The said suit has been instituted by the opposite party/husband to pass a decree of divorce dissolving the marriage between the petitioner and the opposite part y. The plaintiff/ opposite party filed the evidence on affidavit of 6(six) witn esses, out of which 4(four) witnesses were cross-examined leaving Sri Bipradeep Deb, namely the plaintiff and Mr. N. Anik Singh. Those 2(two) witnesses were pr oduced for cross-examination on 9th August, 2011, but they could not be cross-ex amined because of the adjournment sought for by the present petitioner on the gr ound of sudden illness of the learned counsel engaged by her, which prayer, howe ver, has been rejected by the learned Court below vide order dated 9th August, 2 011. It appears from the order dated 9th August, 2011 that the ground taken in the sa id application for adjournment was not disbelieved but the prayer has been rejec ted as several adjournments were already granted to the present petitioner. Since the ground on which the prayer for adjournment was not disbelieved, in my considered opinion, 1(one) more chance is to be granted to the petitioner to cro ss-examine those witnesses. The revision petition is, therefore, disposed of allowing the petitioner 1(one) more chance to cross-examine the aforesaid witnesses, on the date when they are produced for cross-examination. No further opportunity, however, shall be grant ed, in the event the petitioner, for any reason, fails to cross-examine those wi tnesses. The parties are directed to appear before the learned District Judge on 10th Jan uary, 2012 for the purpose of fixation of a date for production of those witness es for cross-examination by the petitioner. The revision petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.