IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No. 4711 of 2009 Date of Decision: 20.8.2009 Kanta Saggi ....Petitioner. Versus Smt. Saroj Kakkar and others ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. Deepak Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. The defendant-petitioner failed to conclude her evidence, in spite of her having been afforded an opportunity by this Court vide order dated 29.7.2009, when she filed Civil Revision No. 4220 of 2009, challenging the order dated 20.7.2009 passed by the trial court closing her evidence by order of the court. In this situation, the trial court was left with no other option but to close the evidence of the petitioner by court's order again on 17.8.2009. The present revision has been filed again seeking one opportunity to conclude the evidence. In the aforesaid revision petition, counsel for the defendant- petitioner had categorically stated that in case one opportunity was granted to the defendant-petitioner, she would lead her entire evidence at her own risk and responsibility on 17.8.2009, the date which was already fixed before the trial court. This Court vide order dated 29.7.2009 (Annexure P-9) granted one opportunity to the defendant- C.R. No. 4711 of 2009 -2- petitioner to conclude her entire evidence at her own risk and responsibility on 17.8.2009, the date already fixed before the trial court subject to payment of Rs.5000/- to the plaintiff-respondent as costs. It was, however, made clear that in case the petitioner failed to conclude her entire evidence on the said date or to pay the costs, as stipulated above, the revision petition was to be deemed to have been dismissed. The defendant-petitioner having failed to adhere to the statement made before this Court on 29.7.2009, did not conclude her entire evidence on the date fixed before the trial court. It is thereupon that the trial court has closed the evidence of the defendant-petitioner vide order dated 17.8.2009. The petitioner has again approached this Court to impugn the said order dated 17.8.2009 (Annexure P-1). In view of the above and after hearing the learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner and perusing the file, no ground for interference with the impugned order by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is made out. Dismissed. August 20, 2009 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE