IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 549 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : 10.09.2009 Raja Singh and others ... PETITIONERS Versus Bhuro and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. S.K. Singla, Advocate, for the petitioners. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. (Oral ) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 5.12.2008, whereby their evidence has been closed by order. In the present case, suit for declaration was filed by the petitioners against 10 persons (defendants). The said suit was decreed ex- parte on 22.1.2002. Against the said ex-parte judgment and decree, one of the defendants, namely Bhuro, filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex-parte decree. In that application, issue was framed to the effect as to whether the defendants in the said suit were properly served or not. The applicant-defendant (respondent No.1 herein) led evidence. Thereafter, the petitioners were afforded opportunity to lead evidence. Vide order dated 25.9.2008, last opportunity was granted to the CR No. 549 of 2009 -2- petitioners to conclude their entire evidence on 5.12.2008 at their own responsibility subject to payment of costs. When the petitioners did not lead evidence on that date, their evidence was closed by order. While admitting this petition, passing of the final order in the proceedings for setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree was stayed. From the record, it appears that in this case, respondent No.1 was served, but she did not appear and due to that reason, the petition was admitted. Now, it has been listed for regular hearing. No one is present on behalf of respondent No.1. After hearing counsel for the petitioners and going through the various zimni orders, I am of the opinion that the petitioners should be granted one opportunity to complete their evidence on one date to be fixed by the trial court at their own responsibility, subject to payment of costs. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the trial court is directed to give one opportunity to the petitioners, by fixing a date, to produce evidence at their own responsibility, subject to payment of Rs. 1,000/- as costs. It is made clear that the trial court shall grant only one opportunity to the petitioners to lead their evidence. September 10, 2009 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE