Civil Revision No.971 of 2010 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.971 of 2010 Date of decision: November 17, 2010. Supinder Singh ...Petitioner(s) v. Sewak Singh ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present: Shri Jaideep Verma, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Shri Dharam Chand Mittal, Advocate, for the respondent. Mahesh Grover , J. (Oral): The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 24.12.2009 vide which his prayer for adducing additional evidence has been declined. Counsel for the petitioner states that the documents which he intended to produce were per se admissible in evidence and no further proof is required to establish the correctness of the said documents. Prayer is opposed by learned counsel for the respondent who states that the evidence was closed in the year 2008 on the statement being made by the petitioner himself, and since he moved this application after lapse of more than one and a half years period, the prayer has been rightly declined by the learned trial court. After hearing, learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material on record, I am of the opinion that the present revision Civil Revision No.971 of 2010 -: 2 :- petition can be disposed of with a direction that the learned trial court shall afford one more opportunity to the petitioner to submit and tender any evidence and the documents he wished to adduce. Ordered accordingly. No further indulgence shall be shown by the learned trial court under any circumstances. To ensure equitable justice, the impugned order is set aside, subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- as costs. [Mahesh Grover] November 17, 2010. Judge kadyan