IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1860 of 2008 RAMJI SHUKUL @ SUKLA Versus RAMCHANDRA SHUKUL@SUKLA & ORS ----------- 2 12/11/2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. It is true that there is apparent default on the part of the petitioner in examining his witnesses despite opportunity given to him in the last one year beginning from 22.11.2006. The explanation, however, given by the petitioner also has some semblance of truth. Be that as it may, interest of justice would require that when the court below has accorded permission to the petitioner to examine the witnesses, such opportunity should be allowed to be availed by the petitioner. It is true that in doing so the defendants would be unnecessarily harassed. For this purpose this Court would direct the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,500/- in the court below which would be paid by the Court to the contesting defendants. Such payment must be made within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a 2 copy of this order and thereafter the court below will allow the petitioner to lead and complete his evidence within a fixed period of ninety days. If however the petitioner does not complete leading of his evidence in the aforesaid period such opportunity shall not be renewed to him. With the aforesaid observation/direction, this application is disposed of. ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J. ) Abhay Kumar