IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.1443 of 2008 Date of Decision:- 01.04.2008 Amrit Kaur and another ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.V.S.Rana, Advocate vs. State Bank of Patiala and another ....Respondent(s) through None. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 14.1.2008 whereby the petitioner-plaintiffs' evidence has been closed. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, the respondents have been duly served, however, no one appears on their behalf. They are accordingly proceeded against ex parte. The petitioners have filed a suit for recovery of Rs.22,16,228/- in forma pauperis. It appears from the record that despite sufficient opportunities, including the last and final one, the petitioner-plaintiffs failed to conclude their evidence, therefore, the learned trial Court has closed the same vide the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the interest of justice, one more opportunity may be granted to enable C.R.No.1443 of 2008 -2- the petitioner-plaintiffs to produce their remaining evidence. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and in the interest of justice, the revision petition is partly allowed; the impugned order dated 14.1.2008 is set aside and the learned trial Court is directed to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner-plaintiffs to produce their remaining evidence on their own responsibility. Dasti. April 01, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE