W.P.(C) No.8052 of 2007 23.9.2015 Assailing the order dated 19.6.2007 passed by the learned Ad hoc Additional Di strict Judge (Fast Track), Jajpur in T.M.S.No.2 of 2001, the present petition is filed under A rticle 227 of the Constitution of India. By the said order, the learned trial court has reject ed the application of the petitioner to recall P.W.1. The petitioner availed a term loan from the opposite party no.1-Bank in the ye ar 1997 to purchase a Tractor for his agricultural purpose. Since the loan amount was not paid , the opposite party no.1 (plaintiff) filed T.M.S. No.2 of 2001 in the court of the learned Ci vil Judge (Sr.Division), Jajpur against the petitioner and guarantor for recovery of the outst anding amount. As it appears, on behalf of the plaintiff, one witness was examined. He was sub jected to extensive cross-examination by the defendants. The evidence was closed. Thereafter, on behalf of the defendants one witness was examined as D.W.1. Since defendants had not examin ed any other witness, evidence of defendants was closed. The suit was posted to 18.6.2007 for argument. On 18.6.2007, the defendants filed two applications, one to amend the writ statement and another to recall the P.W.1. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner-def endant no.1 did not press the petition for amendment. By order dated 19.6.2007, the learned tr ial court rejected both the applications. Heard Mr.Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the oppos ite party no.1. As would be evident from the impugned order, application was filed by the defe ndant no.1 to recall P.W.1. The original documents were not produced before the court. Only ph otostat copies of the same were filed. The documents, which were required to be confronted to P.W.1, are not material to the suit. At the conclusion of the trial, the application was filed to protract the litigation. Thus, no case is made out for interference. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Since hearing of the suit is closed, learned trial court is directed to delive r the judgment within a period of three weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Registry is directed to communicate the order to the learned trial court immediat ely. .. Dr. A.K.Rath, J.