IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.2341 of 2008 Date of Decision:- 25.04.2008 M/s Pragati Steels ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.Rakesh Bhatia, Advocate vs. Nirmala Devi ....Respondent(s) through Mr.Aman Bahri, Advocate. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 12.4.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh, whereby the petitioner-defendant's evidence has been closed. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, learned counsel for the parties have been heard. It appears that previously 4-5 opportunities were granted to the petitioner-defendant to lead its evidence. However, for one or the other reason, the evidence could not be concluded. The case is now fixed before the learned Civil Court on 28.4.2008. In order to show the bona fide of the petitioner, learned counsel submits that the remaining evidence shall be examined by the petitioner at its own responsibility for which reasonable opportunities may be granted. C.R. No.2341 of 2008 -2- Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration all the attending circumstances, I am of the considered view that it will be in the interest of justice to permit the petitioner to lead its evidence on the date fixed as well as one more opportunity to conclude its entire evidence at its own responsibility, however, subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/-. Ordered accordingly. Disposed of. Dasti. April 25, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE