Civil Revision No 1882 of 2009 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 1882 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 2.4.2009 Lalit Kumar ..... Petitioner vs Smt. Sadhna ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Lajwant S. Virk, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajesh Bindal J. The petitioner, who is plaintiff before the court below, has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 12.3.2009 passed by the learned court below, whereby his evidence was closed by order of the court and the case was fixed for defendants' evidence. For the view I am taking in the present petition, I do not deem it appropriate to issue notice to the respondent, as the same would unnecessarily delay not only the disposal of the present petition but the suit as well. The proceedings in the present case arise out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 2,97,380/- filed by petitioner/plaintiff against the respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the date when the impugned order was passed, two PWs were cross- examined. The delay in recording of the evidence of the petitioner occrred because the witness from the bank was required to produce some record which was not available as the bank's computer system was not working. He submitted that only petitioner is left for cross-examination other evidence is complete. In the absence of his cross-examination, his statement in chief will also be not considered. He further submitted that in case one opportunity is granted, the petitioner will complete his entire evidence on the date already fixed i.e. 27.4.2009. The facts submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner are Civil Revision No 1882 of 2009 (2) borne out from the record. It is not a case where the petitioner was not leading evidence rather he is only left for cross-examination. Earlier delay was due to non-availability of bank record. The case is stated to be fixed before the learned court below on 27.4.2009 for evidence of the defendants. Accordingly, while setting aside the impugned order dated 12.3.2009, closing the evidence of the petitioner, the learned court below is directed to grant one opportunity to the petitioner for completing his evidence on the date already fixed by the court before the evidence of the defendants is recorded. The same shall be subject to payment of Rs. 2,000/- as costs to the respondent. It is, however, made clear that no further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner in case he fails to complete his entire evidence on the date fixed. The revision petition is disposed of in the manner indicated above. 2.4.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge