1 18 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1042/2008. Gulab Singh Vs. A.D.J. No.2, Bhilwra & Ors. Date of Order :: 9th May 2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr. M.K. Dudi for Mr. Girish Joshi, for the petitioner. Mr. Prabhat Ojha, for the respondent No.4. ..... BY THE COURT: This writ petition has been preferred by the defendant in a suit for partition and perpetual injunction [C.O. No. 217/2006 in the Court of Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Bhilwara] against the order dated 30.01.2008 whereby the learned Trial Court rejected his application for permission to lead evidence after the same was closed on 14.11.2007. On 15.02.2008, while issuing notice for final disposal in this writ petition, by way of interim order this Court permitted recording of evidence of the petitioner in and on the following terms and conditions:- “In the meanwhile, it is considered appropriate and hence ordered that if the petitioner produces all his witnesses on the next date before the trial court, said to be 22.02.2008, and offers an amount of Rs.5,000/- towards costs to the plaintiff and the plaintiff accept such costs, the trial court may record the statement of the petitioner and his witnesses and may proceed further with the matter. However, if the plaintiff raises any objection on adopting of this procedure, the learned trial court shall record such objection and in that event, further proceedings before the trial court shall remain stayed.” 2 It is informed by the learned counsel for the parties that the requirements of the aforesaid order dated 15.02.2008 were carried out and the witnesses were examined; and thereafter, the suit in question has been decided by the learned Trial Court. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case it appears that the learned Trial Court could have extended an opportunity of leading evidence to the petitioner who stated adverse physical condition being the cause of earlier default on his part. Be that as it may, without dilating further on the issue, in view of the submissions that the evidence of the petitioner has already been recorded and the suit itself has been decided, it appears appropriate to allow this petition in terms of the interim order dated 15.02.2008, to set aside the impugned order, and to clarify that the evidence recorded in pursuance of the said interim order shall form part of the record. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above; the order dated 15.02.2008 as passed in this writ petition is made absolute; and the impugned order dated 30.01.2008 is set aside. The evidence recorded in pursuance of the order dated 15.02.2008 shall form part of the record. No further order as to costs. Mohan/ (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J.