IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CR NO.2012/2009 Date of Decision:17.4.2009. Bhullan and others ..........Petitioners. Versus Smt.Tripta and others ..........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present: Mr.Bijender Dhankar,Advocate for the petitioners. JASWANT SINGH,J(Oral). Petitioners, who are defendants in a suit for permanent injunction, have filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for setting aside the orders dated 9.3.2009 (Annexure P/1) and 27.3.2009(Annexure P/3) whereby learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Sonepat closed their evidence by Court order and also dismissed their application for leading additional evidence. A perusal of the impugned order dated 9.3.2009 (Annexure P/1) reveals that the respondents-plaintiffs instituted the suit on 21.6.2001 and after framing of issues, their evidence was closed on 3.9.2008. Thereafter the matter was fixed for 16.10.2008 for petitioners-defendants' evidence. Since petitioners examined no DW on 16.10.2008, 16.1.2009 and 9.3.2009, the learned Trial Court closed their evidence vide impugned order dated 9.3.2009(Annexure P/1). Thereafter, petitioners moved an application for leading additional evidence, which was also dismissed by the learned Trial Court vide impugned order dated 27.3.2009 (Annexure P/3). Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that respondents-plaintiffs took more than seven years to conclude their evidence whereas petitioners-defendants' evidence has been closed by the learned Trial Court on third date itself. Learned counsel prays that petitioners-defendants be granted one effective opportunity to lead their entire evidence. CR NO.2012/2009 2 It is well settled that laws of procedure are meant to regulate effectively, attend and aid the object of doing substantial and real justice and not to foreclose an adjudication on merits for governing rights of citizens under various laws. Procedural laws must be liberally construed as they are handmaid of justice to advance the ends of justice and technical objections which tend to be stumbling blocks should be discouraged except where the mandate of law inevitably necessitates it. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, perusing the record and keeping in view the settled proposition of law in my considered opinion, it would be just and expedient to grant one last opportunity to the petitioners to conclude their entire evidence on the next date of hearing or on a date to be fixed by the learned Trial Court, subject to payment of costs. For the reasons stated above, present revision petition is allowed, impugned orders dated 9.3.2009 (Annexure P/1) and 27.3.2009(Annexure P/3) are set aside and petitioners-defendants are granted one last opportunity to conclude their entire evidence on the next date of hearing or on a date to be fixed by the learned Trial Court, subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as costs, to be shared equally by all the respondents-plaintiffs. 17.4.2009. (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge