IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1497 of 2008 SUKHI YADAV Versus BIJAY BAHADUR SINGH & ORS ----------- 3 18/9/2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. While there can be no exception to the approach of the court below which has rightly rejected prayer of the petitioner for allowing him to lead evidence especially when default on the part of the petitioner is writ large on the face of record, counsel for the petitioner would submit that for the ends of justice it would be necessary to give at least one more opportunity to the petitioner to lead his evidence. He further submits that only two witnesses are to be examined and that the petitioner would examine them within a period of one week from the date he is allowed to do so. Counsel for the petitioner would, however, urge that the petitioner is very poor man and as such he should not be subjected to cost for the laches and delay caused by him. In the opinion of this Court when the petitioner in course of time of more than three years could adduce only nine 2 witnesses and has virtually been single handedly responsible for delaying the proceeding, he cannot get relief as being prayed unless he compensates the loss which has been sustained by the plaintiff. This Court accordingly would give one last opportunity to the petitioner to adduce his evidence provided the petitioner would pay a cost of Rs. 3,000/- to the plaintiff, opposite party within a period of three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order and of course before starting examination of the witnesses. Such examination of witnesses must be completed by the petitioner within one month from the date of his payment of the aforesaid cost to the plaintiff opposite party and being directed to do so by the Court below. With the aforementioned observations/directions this application is disposed of. ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) Abhay Kumar