IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No. 243 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 11.11.2008 Dr. Ashok Kumar Goyal ..Appellant v. Inderjit Singh alias Jit Singh .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Bhag Singh, Advocate for the appellant. .. Rajesh Bindal J. The plaintiff is in second appeal before this Court against concurrent finding of fact by both the courts below, whereby the suit filed by him claiming damages of Rs. 20,000/- against the respondent-defendant was dismissed under Order 17 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure on account of appellant's leading no evidence. Learned counsel for the appellant-plaintiff submitted that fair opportunity was not afforded to the appellant-plaintiff to lead evidence in this case and it was on that account he was unable to present his case before the courts below in support of his claim. In case, opportunity is granted, he will lead his evidence without any delay. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant, I do not find any merit in the present appeal. The suit was filed claiming damages of Rs. 20,000/- against the respondent-defendant on 21.3.2002. After framing of the issues, as many as six opportunities were granted to the appellant-plaintiff for leading evidence, but he did not avail of them and it was more than 4 years of filing of the suit on 3.4.2006 that the same was dismissed under Order 17 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Considering the fact that the amount involved in the suit is merely Rs. 20,000/-, that too on account of damages, I do not find any justification to interfere in the second appeal as the appellant failed to avail of sufficient opportunities afforded to him for leading evidence. No substantial question of law arises. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) 11.11.2008 Judge mk