CRP 320/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B D AGARWAL This revision application has been filed by the legal heirs of defendant No. 2, challenging the order dated 30.06.2011 passed by the learned Munsiff No.1, Kamru p in Title Suit No. 306 of 2007. By this impugned order, the trial court has rejected the defe ndant’s prayer for adjourning the suit for defence evidence. Heard Mr. B Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Md . S Ali, learned counsel for the opposite party/ plaintiff. Mr. Ali, learned counsel for the opposite party submitted th at the impugned order has been passed after repeated adjournment taken by the de fendant to adduce defence evidence and as such there is no legal infirmity in th e impugned order. On the other hand, Mr. Sinha, learned counsel for the petit ioner submitted that though affidavit evidence by defendant No. 2 was filed on 3 0.07.2010, however, within a period of less than three months, the said defendan t died on 25.10.2010 and in between these period, there was civil holidays also. The learned counsel also submitted that after the death of defendant No.2, his legal heirs were substituted and that was the main reason for delay in adducing evidence. Having regard to all the aspects of the matter, I am of the vie w that justice will prevail if one more opportunity is given to the legal heirs of defendant No.2 to give their evidence. Accordingly, the impugned order is hereby set aside. The petit ioners are directed to give their evidence either oral or in the form of affidav it on the next date i.e. on 17.11.2011. If no evidence is given on that day, the suit shall proceed without further adjournment. With the aforesaid directions, the revision petition stands al lowed with cost of Rs. 5000/- . As per the order-dated 14.09.2011, the petitione rs have deposited the Demand Draft of Rs. 5000/-. The same is handed over to the learned counsel for the opposite party as cost.