IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 1916 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: April 02, 2009 Raj Kumar … Petitioner Versus Ajit Singh. …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present : Mr. Liaqat Ali, Advocate, for the petitioner. S.D. Anand, J. C.M. No. 8226-CII of 2009 Allowed, as prayed for. C.R. No. 1916 of 2009 The learned Trial Court had decreed a suit in favour of the plaintiff – respondent against the defendant – petitioner vide judgment and decree dated 09.08.2007. The decree granted was for the possession of the shop in dispute and also for the recovery of Rs.57,000/- as the arrears of rent. C.R. No. 1916 of 2009 The first appeal filed by the defendant – petitioner was dismissed by the leaned First Appellate Court as time barred by observing as under:- “5. The applicant was given opportunities to produce the evidence, but he failed to produce any evidence and the same was closed vide a detailed order of even date. In the absence of any evidence, this issue is decided against him and in favour of the respondent.” It being a case of complete want of evidence, the learned counsel for the defendant – petitioner is not in a position to invite my attention to any fact which may enable him to argue in favour of the invalidation of the impugned finding. The petition is held to be denuded of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. April 02, 2009 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 2