IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6545 of 2010 Sitaram Sah S/O Sewak Sah, R/O Village-Bhairoganj Bazar,P.O & P.S-Bhairoganj, District-West Champaran. Versus 1. Harinagar Sugar Mills Limited, Harinagar, P.S Ramnagar, District-West Champaran Through S.N. Poddar, The Manager, Harinagar Sugar Mill And Power Of Attorney Holder On Behalf Of Harinagar Sugar Mills, At Harinagar, P.O & P.S- Ramnagar, District-West Champaran. 2. Ramesh Prasad, S/O Motilal Prasad, R/O Village-Bhairoganj Bazar, P.O & P.S - Bhairoganj, District-West Champaran. 3. Sheo Shankar Prasad, S/O Mukhut Prasad, R/O Village- Bhairoganj Bazar, P.O & P.S - Bhairoganj, District-West Champaran. 4. Shafi Jaiswal, S/O Fagu Jaiswal, R/O Village-Bhairoganj Bazar, P.O & P.S - Bhairoganj, District-West Champaran. 5. Basdeo Prasad S/O Mukhlal Prasad, R/O Village-Bhairoganj Bazar, P.O & P.S - Bhairoganj, District-West Champaran. 6. Raj Kumar Prasad, S/O Sri Bharat Prasad, R/O Village-Bhairoganj Bazar, P.O & P.S - Bhairoganj, District-West Champaran. 7. Anil Pandey, S/O Shri Kapildeo Pandey, R/O Village-Bhairoganj Bazar, P.O & P.S - Bhairoganj, District-West Champaran. 8. Daya Shankar Sah S/O Shri Ramadhar Sah, R/O Village- Bhairoganj Bazar, P.O & P.S - Bhairoganj, District-West Champaran. 9. Vishwanath Prasad, S/O Nathuni Prasad, R/O Village-Bhairoganj Bazar, P.O & P.S - Bhairoganj, District-West Champaran. 10. Gopal Sah, S/O Dhruv Sah, R/O Village-Bhairoganj Bazar, P.O & P.S - Bhairoganj, District-West Champaran. 11. Mohan Lal Sah, S/O Pyarelal Sah, R/O Village-Bhairoganj Bazar, P.O & P.S - Bhairoganj, District-West Champaran. 12. The State Of Bihar Thorugh The Chief Secretary,Bihar, Patna. ------------------------ 03/ 22.09.2011 Heard Mr. Ravi Shankar Sahai, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Ramesh Kumar Agrawal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 1. The writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 21.11.2009 passed by learned Munsif, Bagaha, District-West Champaran in Title Suit No. 93 of 1999, whereby the learned court below has been pleased to dismiss the petition filed by the petitioner 2 on 8.10.2009 for recall of the order dated 10.9.2009, whereby the evidence of the defendant-petitioner has been closed. The facts of the matter in brief is that the plaintiff- respondent no. 1 had filed a Title Suit in the court below giving rise to Title Suit No. 93 of 1999 seeking a declaration of management of Lord Shri Shankar Bisheshwar Nath Temple together with the temporary and permanent injunction against the defendant petitioner herein from interfering in any manner with the management of the temple properties. A written statement was filed on behalf of the defendant- petitioner herein denying the contention of the plaintiff respondent no. 1. Upon framing of the issues the trial of the case begun by leading of evidence. Although each of the contesting parties i.e. plaintiff- respondent no. 1 as well as the defendant-petitioner have based their claim to the property by virtue of the sale deed dated 6.8.1947 and mortgage deed dated 11.10.1941 but unfortunately despite the sale deed having been filed in the suit neither of the contesting parties has led the same for evidence and nor has got it marked as exhibits. It is not in dispute that the evidence of the plaintiff has been closed. It is at the stage when the defendant-petitioner herein was called upon to lead his evidence that he filed a petition on 14.7.2009 to summon the sale deed register from the Sub-registry office, Motihari. The petition so filed on 14.7.2009, the required register was not forwarded by the Sub- registry office and as the defendant-petitioner did not choose to go ahead with his evidence, hence the same was closed by order dated 10.9.2009 and a petition for recall the said order filed on 8.10.2009 was rejected by the impugned order dated 21.11.2009 giving rise to the 3 present proceedings. Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant-petitioner and the plaintiff-respondent herein and considering the fact that both the parties have relied upon the mortgage deed dated 11.10.1941 and the sale deed dated 6.8.1947 for establishment of their respective claim, this Court considering the relevancy of the documents and in the interest of justice sets aside the order dated 21.11.2009 together with the order dated 10.9.2009 whereby the learned court below has been pleased to order for the closure of the evidence of the defendant-petitioner. As the certified copies of the two deeds relied upon by the parties are already on record of the suit proceedings, the learned court below would permit the defendant-petitioner as well as the plaintiff- respondent to lead their respective evidence as regarding the aforesaid deeds dated 11.10.1941 and 6.8.1947 enabling them to mark the same as exhibits to the proceedings without waiting for the sale deed register. The parties would ensure that the process of leading of evidence and marking of the exhibits is completed within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The learned court below shall hold the proceedings on day to day basis and shall not grant any undue adjournment to either of the parties. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J.)