IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.709 of 2008 Most Pushpa Devi, wife of late Suresh Prasaad, resident of Mohalla Chowkshikarpur (Nalapar) PS Chowk, PO Begumpur,Distt. Patna -9 .....Petitioner (Defendant in court below) Versus Vinay Krishna son of late Ram Chandra Pd resident of Bahri Begampur, Goraiya Asthan, PS Chowk, PO Begampur, District Patna – 9 ....... Opp. Party (Plaintiff in court below)s ----------- 04- 21/10/2011 None appears on behalf of the petitioner. Heard Mr. Vishal Saurabh for the opposite party. The defendant is the petitioner in an application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure and is aggrieved by the order dated 5.2.2008, passed by the learned Munsif, Patna City, in Title Suit No.26/2006, whereby the learned trial court has rejected the prayer of the defendant to recall the order closing the defendant’s evidence. 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the plaintiff. (opposite party herein). It appears that 20.12.2007 was the date fixed for the defendant to lead her evidence. She failed to produce her witness on that occasion as a result of which the learned trial court had closed the defendant’s evidence. She thereafter filed an application on 3.1.2008 praying to recall that order. The same was not pressed and 2 was rejected. This was followed by a fresh application for recall of the order dated 20.12.2007, which has been rejected by the impugned order. While rejecting the application, the learned trial court has held that the defendant is purposely making every effort to delay the disposal of the suit. He has further observed that the order- sheet discloses that the defendant has althrough been wasting time and, therefore, there is no justification to grant any further indulgence to her. 3. We entirely agree with the order of the learned trial court. This civil revision application is dismissed. mrl ( S K Katriar, J.)