IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.6362 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 18.10.2011. Dr.Subhashni Verma through her GPA Chander Kant ....Petitioner Versus Shri Mandeep Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Nitin Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner ***** Jitendra Chauhan, J.(Oral) The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 11.8.2011 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Faridabad, vide which the evidence of the plaintiff was closed by Court order. Learned counsel contends that the finding of the learned trial that the plaintiff has been granted seven effective opportunities to the petitioner/plaintiff but despite that the petitioner/plaintiff to lead evidence himself has not been examined so far is erroneous. Further contends that on the date of closing the evidence i.e. 11.8.2011, the petitioner examined one witness. Further contends that if the petitioner/ plaintiff is granted one more opportunity, it will not cause prejudice to the opposite party. CR No. 6362 of 2011 (O&M) -2- I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file. The case is fixed for evidence of the defendants. The suit has been filed for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction. If the petitioner/plaintiff is granted one last opportunity to conclude his evidence, it will not cause any prejudice to the defendants/respondents, as the case is fixed for evidence of the defendants/respondents. Non- examination of the witnesses would materially affect the proper adjudication of the case and therefore, in the interest of justice one more opportunity can be granted to the petitioner-plaintiff to lead his evidence Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed; impugned order dated 11.8.2011 is set aside and the learned Trial Court is directed to grant one last opportunity to the petitioner-plaintiff to conclude his entire evidence at his own responsibility, subject to payment of ` 10,000/- as cost. The trial Court will fix the date for evidence of the plaintiff. 18.10.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) gsv JUDGE