In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. CR No.1781 of 2010 (O&M) Decided on 17.5.2010. Gurmit Singh --Petitioner vs. Sukha Singh -- Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. PPS Duggal,Advocate,for the petitioner Mr.L.S.Sidhu,Advocate,for the respondent Rakesh Kumar Jain, J, (Oral) This revision petition is filed against the order of Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ferozepur, dated 9.3.2010, by which evidence of the plaintiff/petitioner has been closed on the ground that he has availed various opportunities including last opportunity, but has failed to conclude his evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on 10.8.2009, the case was adjourned to 19.11.2009 on the request of learned counsel for the petitioner because the witness concerned was not in a position to turn up as he had suffered a fracture. On 19.11.2009, the case was transferred to some other Court, which recorded an order that no PW is present and the case was adjourned to 9.3.2010 for the same purpose and on that date, the evidence of the petitioner was closed. It is submitted that though the petitioner had availed three/ four CR No.1781 of 2010 -2- opportunties, yet, the matter is now fixed for 8.6.2010 for evidence of the defendant and he is ready to bring his entire evidence at his own responsibility on payment of cost. Learned counsel for the respondent, however, opposed the request of the petitioner on the ground that issues were framed in this case on 9.3.2007 and thereafter, plaintiff/petitioner has availed many opportunities but did not lead his evidence, therefore, there is no error in the order of the Court below. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Admittedly, plaintiff/petitioner filed a suit for recovery, therefore, he would be at a loss in delaying the disposal of the suit The witness required to be examined suffered a fracture, therefore, he was unable to attend the Court on 10.8.2009 and on 19.11.2009, the case was transferred to some other Court. Thereafter, on 9.3.2010, the evidence was closed. No doubt, there is some lapse on the part of the petitioner in leading his evidence, but keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the view that one more opportunity should be granted to the petitioner to lead his remaining evidence. In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is granted one last opportunity to lead his entire evidence at his own risk and responsibility on 8.6.2010, i.e. the date already fixed, subject to payment of Rs. 5000/- as costs to the respondents. 17.5.2010 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge