IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. NO.841 OF 2009 DATE OF ORDER: 16.2.2009 Sheetla Mata Mandir Society and others ....Petitioner(s) Versus Makan Mata Sheetla and others ....Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Maharaj Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners. JASWANT SINGH, J. (ORAL) Petitioners have filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 16.12.2008 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge(Sr.Division), Rajpura whereby evidence of the petitioners-plaintiffs was closed by order. Petitioners along with other residents of the Village Seel Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala, alleged trustees of petitioner No.1-Society (plaintiff No.1) had filed a suit in a representative capacity for removal of respondent No.2-Karam Dass from the Mohatrinship of respondent No.1- religious Trust/Mandir; for mandatory injunction regarding rendition of accounts including seeking declaration of mutation No.3616 dated 27.4.1995 ; with a further prayer for permanent injunction restraining respondent No.2 from alienating, transferring the suit property. It is apparent from the record that the said suit was filed on 16.7.2002. On the basis of the pleadings, issues were framed and the case was set down for evidence of the plaintiffs for 13.6.2003. It appears that despite 14 opportunities including one last opportunity subject to payment of Rs.100/- as costs, the evidence of the petitioners-plaintiffs was not concluded. Accordingly, learned Additional C.R. NO.841 OF 2009 #2# Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Rajpura vide its orders dated 16.12.2008 closed the evidence of the petitioners-plaintiffs by order and fixed the case for evidence of the defendants for 17.2.2009. At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners- plaintiffs presses this petition only on behalf of petitioner No.2-Labh Singh S/o Gurcharan Singh and admits that sufficient opportunities have been granted to them for leading evidence. However, learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that only Labh Singh reamins to be examined, therefore, he prays for one opportunity at his own responsibility subject to payment of costs to lead the entire evidence on that date. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the paper book, this Court is of the opinion that since the suit relates to the alleged mis-management in functioning of a religious Trust/Mandir, it would serve the interest of justice, if one last opportunity is granted to the petitioners-plaintiffs for examing the said Labh Singh on that date. No prejudice would be caused to the respondents-defendants, at this stage as they shall have full opportunity to rebutt the same. Accordingly, order dated 16.12.2008 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge(Sr.Divn.), Rajpura is set aside and learned trial Court is directed to grant one effective opportunity to the petitioners- plaintiffs to examine aforesaid Labh Singh on a date to be fixed by it subject to Labh Singh making payment of Rs.10,000/- as costs to be paid to Karam Dass-respondent No.2(Trustee) on behalf of respondent No.1-defendant No.1. This order is being passed without issuing notice to the respondents as it would result in unnecessarily delay in the matter and C.R. NO.841 OF 2009 #3# expenses for the other party. In any case, respondents are being compensated by way of costs. It is made clear that in case other party is aggrieved by this order, it may file appropriate application for recalling of this order. Petition stands allowed with the abovesaid directions. February 16, 2009 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE