Civil Revision No. 2405 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision No. 2405 of 2011 Date of decision:- 08.04.2011 Divisional forest Officer, Yamuna Nagar and others ....Petitioners Vs. Surinder Kumar ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL ****** Present:- Mr. Sukant Gupta, Addl. A.G. Haryana, for the petitioners. A.N. JINDAL, J (ORAL) This petition assails the order dated 25.02.2011 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jagadhri, whereby application filed by the defendants-petitioners (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioners') for recalling the order dated 17.02.2011 and for allowing the petitioners to lead evidence, was dismissed. The plaintiff-respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent') had filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the petitioners from cutting and removing the trees from the land measuring 42 Kanals 8 Marlas, as detailed in the heading of the plaint, with a consequential relief for restraining the petitioners from interfering in the cutting and removing process of the above said trees in any manner. The plea of the petitioners was that the land, over which the trees were standing, belong to the State and the trees Civil Revision No. 2405 of 2011 2 were planted by the State about 30 years ago. The suit was filed in the year 2006 and the respondent took sufficient time for leading evidence. Now the grievance of the State is that they were not given sufficient time to lead evidence. In view of this, it would be expedient in the interest of justice, if some more time is given to the petitioners to lead evidence. However, the delay in concluding the evidence could be compensated with costs. Resultantly, this petition is accepted, the impugned order is set aside and the petitioners are directed to conclude their evidence within three months, subject to payment of Rs.2,000/- as costs. This petition is disposed of without issuing notice to the respondents with a view to impart complete justice to the parties and to save the huge expenses, which may be incurred by the respondents as also in order to avoid unnecessary delay in adjudication of the matter. Still, if dissatisfied, the respondents may move to this Court for recalling this order. (A.N.JINDAL) 8th of April, 2011 JUDGE ajp