Civil Revision No. 1442 of 2009 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 1442 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 17.3.2009 Smt. Santosh ..... Petitioner vs Banita and another ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. P. S. Khurana, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajesh Bindal J. Prayer in the present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is for setting aside order dated 18.2.2009 passed by the learned court below, whereby evidence of the petitioner/defendant was closed by order of the court. 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 suit as well. The proceedings in the present case arise out of a suit for declaration filed by respondent no. 1/plaintiff. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner/defendant was not at fault. He submitted that on 18.2.2009, DW Jagatpal was present but due to the reason that he had undergone heart by- pass surgery from the Apolo Hospital, he could not depose as a witness. His affidavit as examination-in-chief was ready. It is due to this reason, which was beyond the control of the petitioner, she could not complete her evidence. Learned counsel further submitted that in case one opportunity is granted, the petitioner will complete her entire evidence on the date fixed. The facts submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner are borne out from the record. The case is stated to be fixed for hearing on 18.3.2009. It is not a case where the petitioner was at fault for not producing witness. She had produced the witness in the court but the witness due to his Civil Revision No. 1442 of 2009 (2) ill health could not depose in the court. Accordingly, while setting aside the impugned order dated 18.2.2009, closing the evidence of the petitioner, the learned court below is directed to grant one opportunity to the petitioner for completing her evidence on the date to be fixed by the court. The same shall be subject to payment of Rs. 2,000/- as costs to respondent no.1/plaintiff. It is, however, made clear that no further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner in case she fails to complete the entire evidence on the date fixed. The revision petition is disposed of in the manner indicated above. 17.3.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge