// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2217/2008 Sanjay Agarwal S/o Shri Chiranji Lal Agarwal Versus Nagar Nigam Jaipur Date of Order ::: 18.08.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Pankaj Gupta, Counsel for petitioner Shri S.N. Gupta, Counsel for respondent #### By the Court:- Admit. Shri S.N. Gupta, Advocate, appears for the respondent. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction. The suit was fixed for plaintiff's evidence on 14th August, 2007, but evidence was not adduced, therefore, the same was closed. Thereafter the plaintiff filed an application on 19th September, 2007 to reopen his evidence but the same was rejected by the trial court vide order dated 12th February, 2008, which is under challenge in this writ petition preferred on behalf of the plaintiff. The learned counsel for the plaintiff contended that when the matter was fixed for // 2 // plaintiff's evidence on 14th August, 2007, the plaintiff could not make himself present as he had gone to 'vaishnao devi'. He further contended that his absence, in these circumstances, was not deliberate but it was a bona-fide, therefore, one last more opportunity may be granted to him to adduce his evidence. The learned counsel for the respondent defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and examined the impugned order dated 12th February, 2008 and also the other documents annexed with the writ petition and, after considering the same, I find that ends of justice will meet in case one last more opportunity is granted to the plaintiff to adduce his evidence at his own on payment of costs. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order closing the evidence of the plaintiff as well as the order dated 12th February, 2008 rejecting his application to reopen his evidence, both, are set-aside. The plaintiff is permitted to adduce his evidence on 9th and 10th of September, 2008 on payment of costs of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only), which will be paid on or before // 3 // the aforesaid date, failing which the plaintiff's evidence will not be allowed to be adduced. The learned counsel for the respondent contended that the defendant's evidence was closed only for the reason that the plaintiff's evidence was closed, therefore, now the defendant may also be allowed to adduce its evidence. The prayer is allowed. As and when the plaintiff's evidence is adduced, the case will be fixed for defendant's evidence. So far as this writ petition is concerned, the costs is made easy. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//