CR No.6387 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.6387 of 2010 (O&M) Decided on : 12-10-2010 Kehar Singh ....Petitioner VERSUS Satnam Singh ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present:- Mr.S.S.Rangi, Advocate for the petitioner. MAHESH GROVER, J There is no legal infirmity in the impugned order dated 19.3.2010. The petitioner commenced upon the exercise to adduce his evidence in the year 2000. Eight years thereafter he is unable to conclude his evidence satisfactorily. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the last three orders passed in the year 2009 to contend that it was not his fault and that it was purely on account of the fact that the file was not traceable that he could not conclude his evidence. This Court is not convinced with the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner for the simple reason that for the last 7 years atleast, the petitioner has not been able to conclude his evidence even if the effect of last three orders is to be taken into consideration. There is no justification to permit the petitioner any further indulgence but purely in the interest of justice, the impugned order is set aside without CR No.6387 of 2010 (O&M) 2 issuance of notice of motion to other side as resorting to this process is likely to delay the proceedings further the other side can be compensated with costs. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside, however, subject to payment of Rs.25,000/- as costs and the petitioner as a consequence thereof, shall be granted only one effective opportunity to lead his entire evidence positively. The Trial Court shall grant only one opportunity for the said purpose and shall not grant the petitioner more than one opportunity under any circumstance whether justifiable or unjustifiable. The impugned order therefore stands set aside subject to the deposit of costs aforesaid. Disposed of. October 12, 2010 (Mahesh Grover) rekha Judge