IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 281 of 2011 Decided on: 10.08.2011 Gian Chand …Petitioner. Versus Balbir Singh & another …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. Suneet Goel, Advocate. For the respondents: None. Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) By means of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 13th June, 2011, whereby the evidence of the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff') had been closed. 2. A perusal of the record shows that issues were framed on 25.08.2008. On various dates, the Presiding Officer of the learned Court below was on leave, but on one date, i.e. 28.05.2009, evidence of the plaintiff was not 1 Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. -: 2 :- present and a request for adjournment was moved. Thereafter, seven more effective hearings were given to the plaintiff to produce his evidence, but he has not produced the same. The learned trial Court was very lenient in as many as eight opportunities spread over three years have been given to the plaintiff. 3. I see no reason to interfere with the order of the learned trial Court closing the evidence of the plaintiff. Hence, the petition is rejected. No order as to costs. (Deepak Gupta) Judge August 10, 2011 (rajni)