IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1781 of 2008 PANCHANAND YADAV & ANR Versus SAKHICHAND MANDAL & ORS ----------- 2. 24.10.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioners. Strictly speaking there is no good ground for this Court to interfere with the impugned order save and except that the interest of justice would require the petitioners to be given at least one opportunity to lead their evidence in a suit where the other set of defendant is State of Bihar and is not likely to produce any material to defend its own entry of course in favour of the petitioners defendants 2nd set. Infact if the petitioners had expected that the State of Bihar will defend their case, they have to thank their own stars. Be that as it may, this Court would find that the petitioners’ substantial right is involved and closing their evidence would virtually amount to hearing the suit ex- parte. That being so, this Court would direct the court below to give one indulgence to the petitioners to lead their evidence. Counsel for the petitioners 2 assures that whatever evidence has to be led by the petitioners, the same will be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. Accordingly, this application is allowed to the aforementioned extent and the petitioners are directed to pay a cost of Rs.5000/- to the plaintiff within a period of one month from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order which would be a condition precedent for allowing them to lead their evidence. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this application is allowed to extent indicated above. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/