IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 1949 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: February 25, 2011 Bharat Electronics Limited .. Petitioner Vs. Surjit Singh and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Viney Puri, Advocate for Mr. D.K. Bhatti, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J (Oral) The petitioner has invoked the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 16.2.2010 passed by the trial court whereby the evidence of the petitioner- defendant was closed by order. The evidence of the defendant was closed by order on 16.2.2010 but his grievance is that he may be provided with one opportunity to lead his entire evidence. Irrespective of the fact that the petitioner has availed several opportunities, yet in the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be expedient in the interest of justice if opportunity is granted to him to lead evidence. The delay could be compensated with costs. In the circumstances, the instant petition is allowed, impugned order is set aside and the petitioner is given three months time from today to conclude his entire evidence subject to payment of Rs.5000/- as costs. No further opportunity would be granted to him. February 25, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge