CR No.613 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.613 of 2009 Date of decision: 4.2.2009 Gurcharan Singh and others ......Petitioners Versus Gurbachan Kaur and others ......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Sherry K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioners. * * * Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. This revision petition has been directed against the order dated 10.3.2008 whereby evidence of the plaintiffs has been closed by order and further for setting aside the order dated 19.1.2009 vide which application of the petitioners allowing them to appear as their own witnesses has been rejected. As per the averments made in the petition, issues in the suit were framed by the trial Court on 15.12.2006 and thereafter the case was fixed for the plaintiffs' evidence on 30.3.2007. While closing the evidence of the plaintiffs by order dated 10.3.2008 (Annexure P-1), the trial Court observed that the plaintiffs had availed sufficient opportunities including the last opportunity for leading their evidence and there was no justification for granting them any further opportunity. It is relevant to mention here that thereafter the defendants led their evidence which was closed vide order dated 7.11.2008. It is at this stage that the petitioners filed an application dated 18.11.2008 under Section 151 CPC for allowing them to appear as their own witnesses stating therein that they could not examine themselves inadvertently. The said application was opposed by the respondents. CR No.613 of 2009 2 While dismissing the aforesaid application, the trial Court observed that finding no justification, the evidence of the petitioners was closed by order dated 10.3.2008 and thereafter, even the evidence of the defendants was concluded and in such circumstances, application filed by the petitioners for allowing them to appear as their own witnesses would cause serious prejudice to the case of the respondents and the plaintiffs cannot have benefit of their own wrong at this stage. Even before this Court, the petitioners have failed to point out any material irregularity or error of jurisdiction committed by the trial Court while passing the impugned orders. Rather from the perusal of impugned orders, it is crystal clear that the petitioners were given sufficient opportunities to lead their evidence and there was no justification to grant them more time for leading their evidence and further the application filed by them for allowing them to appear as their own witnesses at the fag end of the case, was not justified. No merit. Dismissed. February 4, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE