SCA/9983/2008 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9983 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= RAIBEN REVABHAI SOLANKI & 1 - Petitioner(s) Versus PATEL SOMABHAI SHANKARBHAI - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR TEJAS P SATTA for Petitioner(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5,1.2.6 - 2. Mr. Mahendra K. Patel for Respondent(s) : , ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 11/08/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Rule. Mr. M.K. Patel, wavies service of rule on behalf of the respondent. With the consent of the SCA/9983/2008 2/3 JUDGMENT parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today. 2. By way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order passed by the learned trial Court passed below Exh. 108 dated 12.3.2008 passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 16 of 1998, by which the learned trial Court has dismissed the application submitted by the petitioners to re-open their right to lead evidence. 3. It appears from the record and impugned order that learned trial Court passed an order to close the right of the plaintiffs to lead the evidence on 13.2.2007 and thereafter the impugned application was submitted by the plaintiffs on 24.7.2007 requesting to re-open their right to lead evidence. However, the learned trial Court was of the opinion that the application was submitted belatedly, the learned trial Court dismissed the said application. Considering the fact that even thereafter also the matter has not proceeded further and to take away the right of the plaintiffs to lead the evidence would be to harsh and would be doing injustice, the learned SCA/9983/2008 3/3 JUDGMENT trial Court ought to have reopened the right of the plaintiffs to lead the evidence. 4. Even, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that there was a long delay in submitting the application to re-open their right to lead evidence. 5. For the reasons stated above, the petition succeeds. The impugned order passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge, Vadnagar dated 12.3.2008 in Regular Civil Suit No. 16 of 1998 passed below Exh. 108 is hereby quashed and set aside and the application Exh. 108 is allowed and the right of the plaintiffs to lead the evidence is reopened. The learned trial Court is directed to decide and dispose of the suit expeditiously. Rule is made absolute accordingly. In the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. (M.R.SHAH, J) Kaushik