IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.416 of 2009 Ashok Kumar Vishwakarma, son of Devi Prasad Sharma, resident of village Khalasi Mohalla Jhajha, P.O. & P.S. Jhajha, District Jamui, business is at Jhajha Bazar near Police Station Jhajha, Jamui………………………………Defendant-Petitioner. Versus Ashok Kumar Burnwal, son of Late Gopal Prasad Burnwal, resident of village Purani Bazar Jhajha, P.O. & P.S. Jhajha, District Jamui……………………………………….Plaintiff-Opposite party. For the petitioner :M/s S.K. Thakur and S.P. Parasar, Advocates. For the opposite party : None. ----------- 04/ 15.09.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. This civil revision has been filed by the sole defendant-petitioner challenging order dated 08.12.2008 by which the learned Munsif, Jamui, closed his evidence without giving any adjournment as prayed for in Eviction Suit No.03 of 2005. The aforesaid suit was filed by the sole plaintiff- opposite party for eviction of the sole defendant-petitioner on the ground of bonafide personal requirement of the plaintiff and his two sons, who were sitting idle. In the said suit the defendant appeared and contested, whereafter issues were framed and evidence started much earlier and the evidence of the plaintiff was closed, whereafter defendant was directed to produce evidence. From the impugned order it transpires that the defendant got the suit adjourned by filing repeated applications for 2 adjournment and finally on 08.12.2008 he again filed an application for adjourning the case on the ground of illness. The learned court below considered the matter in detail and after looking at the defendant, found that he did not appear to be incapable of deposing, but in spite of that he was not ready to depose on the said date. It was further found by the learned court below that the prescription of the doctor produced by defendant did not inspire confidence, as in that prescription it was written that the said prescription should not be used for medico-legal purposes. If the said prescription is not for any medico-legal purposes it is quite apparent that the same is absolutely useless and learned court below was quite justified in ignoring the same. In the said circumstances, this court does not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the impugned order of the learned court below. Accordingly, this civil revision is dismissed with a direction to the learned court below to expedite the disposal of the said eviction suit within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, as it is already four years old. harish/ ( S. N. Hussain, J. )