C.R. No. 1290 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 1290 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 1.3.2011 Angoori Devi ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .......Respondents **** CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present : Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. Plaintiff-petitioner has filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction. Vide the impugned order dated 20.12.2010 the evidence of the petitioner was closed. Hence, the present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that although the service on witness (clerk) had been effected, but he had failed to appear in the Court. The said witness was the only witness who remained to be examined. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner be given one opportunity to enable him to examine the said witness. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves to be allowed. C.R. No. 1290 of 2011 (O&M) 2 In the facts and circumstances of the present case, it would be in the interest of justice to allow the petition. Petitioner had done the needful and witness had been served but the said witness had failed to appear in the court. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. The trial Court is directed to grant one opportunity to the petitioner-plaintiff to lead his remaining evidence at his own risk and responsibility. (SABINA) JUDGE March 1, 2011 Anand