IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.244 of 2009 Date of decision: 16.1.2009 Parwinder Kumar and another ......Petitioners Versus M/s. Walia Motor Fianancers (Regd.) and another ......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. IPS Kohli, Advocate for the petitioners. * * * Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. The petitioners' evidence was closed by order dated 26.8.2008 by the trial Court. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners preferred Civil Revision No.4849 of 2008 in this Court which was allowed vide order dated 10.9.2008 and the petitioners were granted one opportunity to conclude their entire evidence subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as costs to be paid to the respondent. The petitioners deposited the costs and one opportunity was granted by the trial Court to the petitioners to conclude their evidence and the case was fixed for 4.12.2008. As per the averments made in this petition, petitioner No.1 fell ill on 29.11.2008 and was admitted to the hospital with complaint of liver pain. Along with this petition, the petitioner No.1 has also annexed certificate of the hospital as Annexure P-4 and P-6 and it is also averred in the petition that the petitioners filed an application vide Annexure P-3 before the trial Court to adjourn the case. However, vide impugned order dated 4.12.2008, the trial Court rejected the prayer of the petitioners for adjournment and closed the evidence of the petitioners by order. By way of this revision petition, the petitioners have challenged the aforesaid order dated 4.12.2008. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and going CR No.244 of 2009 -2- through the file, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be amply met with if the petitioners are granted one more opportunity to conclude their evidence by compensating the other party by way of heavy costs. Accordingly, impugned order dated 4.12.2008 is set aside and the petition is allowed subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- as costs to be paid to the respondents. Payment of costs shall be condition precedent for permitting the petitioners to produce their witnesses in support of their case. It is further made clear that the petitioners shall conclude their evidence on the date so fixed by the trial Court and the petitioners will not be granted any further opportunity for any reason. After the evidence is concluded, the trial Court shall proceed with the case in accordance with law. January 16, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE