CRP 79/2007 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR MADAN B. LOKUR Mr B Banerjee, learned counsel for the petitioner says that respondent Nos.2, 5, 15 and 17 may be deleted from the memo of parties. The request is granted. Regi stry will make the necessary corrections. Despite service none of the other respondents have entered appearance. According to learned counsel for the petitioner an affidavit by way of e xamination in chief had been filed though it was filed after three adjournments were granted to the petitioner. The learned trial Judge relying upon Order XVII Rule 1 CPC declined to t ake the affidavit on record since three adjournments had already been granted. Looking to the facts of this case, particularly the fact that the petiti oner is the plaintiff in the suit, which pertains to land, I think the interest of justice will be served if the affidavit of the plaintiff is allowed to be tak en on record. I have also taken into consideration the fact that the proceedings have remained stayed for the last four years since the records have been called for by the High Court. Consequently, the suit has not proceeded for several yea rs to nobody’s advantage. Under the circumstances the learned Trial Court is directed to take the affidavit of the petitioner on record in TS No.44/06 pending in the Court of Mun siff, Golaghat subject to payment of costs of Rs.2500/- which will be paid by th e petitioner to the Assam State Legal Services Authority within four weeks. The parties will appear before the Trial Court on 12-01-2011. If the res pondents/defendants do not appear on that date the learned Trial Judge will take steps for effecting service on them. The petition stands disposed of. Send back the LCRs immediately.