C. R. No. 4150 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : C. R. No. 4150 of 2010 Date of Decision : July 23, 2010 Radhey Shyam .... Petitioner Vs. Raminder Nath Sharma and others .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : Plaintiff Radhey Shyam has filed the instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing order dated 14.05.2010, passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Panchkula, thereby closing evidence of the plaintiff-petitioner by court order. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that only one more opportunity may be granted to the petitioner for his remaining evidence at own responsibility on payment of cost. C. R. No. 4150 of 2010 2 I have carefully considered the aforesaid prayer. Perusal of zimni orders of the trial court (Annexure P-2 Colly.) reveals that the plaintiff-petitioner was granted six effective opportunities in all for his evidence. Proviso to Order 17 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure lays down that not more than three adjournments shall be granted to a party for its evidence. However, the said provision is directory and not mandatory being rule of procedure. It is correct that in the instant case, the petitioner had been granted six opportunities instead of three stipulated by law. Nevertheless, to meet the ends of justice, I am of the considered opinion that one more opportunity may be granted to the petitioner on payment of heavy cost. I intend to dispose of the instant revision petition without issuing notice to the respondents so as to avoid further delay in the disposal of the suit and to save the respondents of the expenses, which they may have to incur in engaging counsel for the instant revision petition, if notice thereof is issued to them. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the instant revision petition is allowed and the trial court is directed to grant only one more opportunity to the petitioner to adduce his entire remaining evidence at own responsibility, subject to payment of Rs.7,500/- as cost precedent. Assistance of the Court may be taken for summoning evidence. However, not more than one opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner for his C. R. No. 4150 of 2010 3 evidence, even on the ground of non-service of any witness or non- appearance of any witness in spite of service or on any other ground, whatsoever. July 23, 2010 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE