C. R. No. 604 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : C. R. No. 604 of 2010 Date of Decision : January 29, 2010 Deep Chand and another .... Petitioners Vs. Bijender and others .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Mr. Mohd. Yousaf, Advocate for Mr. M. S. Tewatia, Advocate for the petitioners. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : This is revision petition by legal representatives of plaintiff (since deceased), under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging order dated 28.02.2009 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Palwal, thereby closing oral evidence of the plaintiff by court order and adjourning the case to 15.04.2009 for tendering documents, if any, by the plaintiff and also for evidence of the defendants. Learned counsel for the petitioners prays that only one opportunity may be granted to the petitioners on payment of cost for appearance of petitioner no.1 as witness and for producing documents. Before adverting to the aforesaid prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioners, it has to be noticed that the instant revision petition has been filed after delay of 11 months from the passing of the impugned order C. R. No. 604 of 2010 2 and there is no explanation for the same. However, learned counsel for the petitioners states that evidence of the defendants has not yet been closed. It is also to be noticed that even vide impugned order dated 28.02.2009, the petitioners were granted another opportunity to tender documents, if any, but it appears that the said opportunity was also not availed of. Perusal of the impugned order reveals that petitioners were granted four opportunities for their evidence. Keeping in view all the circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be served if one more opportunity is granted to the petitioners on payment of cost. However, the petitioners have to be burdened with heavy cost on account of delay in filing the revision petition as well. 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 also to save the respondents of the expenses, which they may have to incur in engaging counsel for the instant revision petition, if notice is issued to them. In view of the aforesaid, the instant revision petition is allowed and trial court is directed to grant only one more opportunity to the petitioners for their evidence i.e. for examination of petitioner no.1 only as witness and for tendering documents in evidence, subject to payment of Rs.7,500/- as cost. January 29, 2010 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE