Civil Revision No. 458 of 2009 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 458 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 28.1.2009 Amrik Kaur alias Rajwinder Kaur and others ..... Petitioners vs Vijay Kumar and others ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Bikramjit Arora,Advocate, for the petitioners. Rajesh Bindal J. Prayer in the present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is for setting aside order dated 16.1.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short, “the Tribunal”), whereby evidence of the petitioners was closed by order of the Tribunal. For the view I am taking in the present petition, I do not deem it appropriate to issue notice to the respondents, as the same would unnecessarily delay not only the disposal of the present petition but also the claim petition as well. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners no. 2 to 4 are the minor children of petitioner no. 1, widow of Gurdial Singh, who died in accident on 28.11.2003. The claim petition was filed by the petitioners on 9.6.2006 and the issues were framed on 22.4.2008. It was submitted that examination-in-chief of petitioner no. 1 was completed on 27.8.2008 and her cross-examination was deferred on the request of counsel for the respondents and the case was adjourned for 6.10.2008. No evidence was produced on the adjourned date and on 14.11.2008 two witnesses were examined and last opportunity was granted to conclude the entire evidence on 8.12.2008. On 8.12.2008, the witnesses were present but due to strike of the lawyers, they were not examined and the case was adjourned to 16.1.2009. He further submitted that Jarnail Singh was present and he has filed affidavit for his examination-in-chief but his presence was not marked. On 16.1.2009, one witness was examined and the evidence of the petitioners Civil Revision No. 458 of 2009 (2) was closed by order. He further submitted that in case one opportunity is granted, the petitioners will complete their entire evidence on the date to be fixed as they only want to examine one eye-witness. The facts submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner are borne out from the record. Considering the totality of circumstances and the fact that the petitioners claimants will suffer injustice because of no fault on their part, in my opinion, it is a fit case where the petitioners deserve to be granted one more opportunity to lead evidence. The case is fixed for hearing before the court below on 29.1.2009. Accordingly, while setting aside the impugned order dated 16.1.2009, closing the evidence of the petitioners by order of the Tribunal, the learned Tribunal court is directed to grant one opportunity to the petitioners for completing their evidence on the date to be fixed by the Tribunal after 29.1.2009. The petitioners shall be at liberty to get summons issued for any official witness. It is, however, made clear that no further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioners in case they fail to complete their entire evidence on the date fixed. The revision petition is disposed of in the manner indicated above. 28.1.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge