With the consent of the parties, this appeal is being heard finally at the stage of admission today. (2) Heard finally‘ (3) The appellant!plaintiff is aggrieved by the dismissal of the civil suit NoSO-B/2002 by the lVth Additional District Judge, Ambikapur, Disttt Sarguja (CG) on 2632003. (4) The sole ground urged by the learned counsel for the appellantlplaintiff in this appeal is that the lVth Additional District Judge, Ambikapur, Distt. Sarguja ought to have afforded a reasonable opportunity to the appellant/plaintiff to lead evidence. (5) A perusal of the record shows that the civil suit was hxed for recording evidence of the plaintiff on 7.12.2002 on which date, an adiournment was sought by the plaintiff. The suit was adjourned to 29.1 .2003. On that date, the appellant/plaintiff again prayed for an adjournment. The suit was adjourned to 6.3.2003, On 6.3.2003, application under Order 17 Rule 1 CPC was filed by the appellant/plaintiff on the ground that the witness for the appellant/plaintiff was required to go Raigarh on official duty and was therefore absent. It was prayed that one opportunity be granted to the appellantlplaintiff to lead evidence. This prayer was rejected. The suit was HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR Single Bench: Hon’ble Shri Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh, J. F.A. No. 115 of 2003 v Appellant . Karyapalik Adhikari, Madhya Pradesh Plaintiff Rajya Pashudhan Avam Kukkut Vikas Nigam, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (CG) Versus Respondents : Branch Manager, Defendants Central Bank of India & Others Memo of appeai under Section 96 of CPC Present: Smt Meena Sastry, counsei for the appeilant. Shri H.S. Patel, counsel forlhe respondents. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 12.112008) @ w?”- fixed for recording evidence of the defendants on 15.3,2G03. On this date and on 17.32003, adjournments were granted to the defendants to adduce evidence. On 20.3.2003, Iearned [Vth Additional District Judge, Ambikapur; Distt. Sarguja rejected the appiication filed by the plaintiff under Order 4T Rule 1 read with Section 151 of CPO for review of the order dated 603.2003. Upon rejection of the said application, the defendants stated that they would not lead any evidence. The matter was again adjourned for final arguments on 24.3.2003, 26.32003. (6) A perusal of the manner and the circumstances under which the prayer for adjournment of the appellant/plaintiff was rejected by the learned lVth Additional District Judge, Ambikapur, Distti Sarguja leaves no room for any doubt that in the interest of justice and for doing complete justice between the parties, an opportunity ought to have been granted to the appellantlplaintiff to adduce evidence since sufficient unavoidable cause had been shown for absence of witness on 6.3.2003. (7) ln this view of the matter, the impugned judgment and decree passed on 26.3.2003 by the learned lVth Additional District Judge, Amblkapur, Distt. Sarguja is liable to be set aside. (8) ln the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and decree dated 26.3.2003 passed by the learned lVth Additional District Judge, Ambikapur, Distt. Sarguja is set aside. The matter is remanded to the trial Court with a direction to afford a reasonable oppodunity to the parties to lead evidence and to decide the civil suit thereafter in accordance with law. The impugned judgment and decree was passed on (9) Parties are directed to appear before the learned lVth Additional District Judge, Ambikapur, Distt. Sarguja on 13.01.2009. There shall be no“ order as to costs. l Sdl- ilip Raosaheb Deshmukh l i l a Judge, Priya sp