C.R. No. 1177 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 1177 of 2009 Date of Decision: September 7, 2009 Nirlep Singh …..Petitioner Vs. Balbir Singh and others …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.Rakesh Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.P.S. Pannu, Advocate for the respondents. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Vide impugned order dated August 5, 2008, the trial Court has set aside the ex-parte proceedings against the defendant but has not permitted the defendant to produce evidence whereas the defendant merely had to tender documents and close his evidence. I have heard counsel for the petitioner as well as counsel for the respondents. It is apparent from the record that the defendant- petitioner C.R. No. 1177 of 2009 [2] was not present on September 21, 2007 when it was last opportunity for the defendant – petitioner to produce the evidence. The trial Court proceeded against the defendant- petitioner ex-parte and also simultaneously closed the evidence of the defendant and adjourned the case to September 24, 2007 for arguments. On September 21, 2007, the defendant moved an application annexure P-3 for setting aside the ex-parte proceedings. The trial Court has set aside the ex-parte proceedings against the defendant and declined the permission to lead evidence. The impugned order dated August 5, 2008 is patently illegal order. As on September 21, 2009, when the evidence of the petitioner was closed by order, the case was fixed for the evidence of defendant. Defendant had to close the defendant’s evidence by producing certain documents. As defendant was not present, the trial Court proceeded against the defendant ex-parte and adjourned the matter. When the order dated September 21, 2007 was recalled, a right accrued to the defendant to produce the evidence as the arms of the clock reverted back to the stage when the evidence was closed. The trial Court ought to have permitted the petitioner to tender in evidence the documents in accordance with the procedure of law. The revision petition is allowed. Order dated August 5, 2008 to the extent of denying an opportunity to the defendant to produce the evidence is hereby set aside. It is ordered that the defendant will be given an opportunity to tender in evidence the documents in accordance with law. September 7, 2009 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE C.R. No. 1177 of 2009 [3]