Civil Revision No. 7581 of 2009 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 7581 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 1.2.2010 Shiv Dayal and others ..... Petitioners vs Sandhya Devi and another ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Sunil Agnihotri, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Avtar Singh, Advocate, for the respondents. Rajesh Bindal J. Prayer in the present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is for setting aside order dated 13.10.2009 passed by the learned court below, whereby evidence of the petitioners-plaintiffs was closed by order of the court. The proceedings in the present case arise out of a suit for of mandatory injunction filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs against the respondents/defendants. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the suit was filed by the plaintiffs/ petitioners on 15.6.2004. On 23.9.2004, written statement was filed by the respondents. The issues were framed on 14.3.2005. Thereafter, the case was adjourned on many dates as the original file was not received from the Appellate Court, where the proceedings against interim order granted by the trial court were pending. The same was received in the year 2007 and the case was fixed for the first time for petitioners evidence on 27.9.2007. On 26.2.2008, affidavit of one of the witnesses was filed and the case was adjourned to 22.5.2008 on which date as the Presiding officer has to preside over the mobile court, the case was adjourned to 17.9.2008. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have tried their best to conclude the evidence but due to reasons beyond their control, it could not be concluded. He prays that in case one opportunity is granted, the petitioners will complete their entire evidence on the next date. Civil Revision No. 7581 of 2009 (2) The facts submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners are borne out from the record. As is evident from the zimni orders, it is not that only the petitioners were responsible for taking adjournments but on many occasions, the original file was not available with the court due to which the delay has occurred. The case is stated to be fixed before the court below on 2.3.2010. The evidence of the defendants is yet to start. In view of the above facts and circumstances, while setting aside the impugned order dated 13.10.2009, closing the evidence of the petitioners, the learned court below is directed to grant one opportunity to the petitioners for completing their evidence on the date already fixed by it. The same shall be subject to payment of Rs. 3,000/- as costs to the respondents/defendants. It is, however, made clear that no further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioners in case they fail to complete their entire evidence on the date already fixed. The revision petition is disposed of in the manner indicated above. 1.2.2010 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge