CR No.6747 of 2009 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.6747 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: November 18, 2009 Smt.Rekha Rani ...........Petitioner Versus Smt.Narinder Kaur and another ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs.Justice Sabina Present: Mr.Johan Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. -- Sabina, J. Plaintiff-Smt.Rekha Rani filed a suit for specific performance of contract. Vide impugned order dated 18.8.2009, the evidence of the plaintiff was closed by order. Hence, the present revision petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on 18.8.2009, the summons of the Clerk of the Housing Board Haryana, Faridabad had been received back unserved. Plaintiff was not at fault. Hence, the evidence of the plaintiff could not have been closed by order. Learned counsel has submitted that only one opportunity may be granted to the petitioner to lead her evidence. Now the case was listed before the trial Court on 20.11.2009 for defendants' evidence. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves to be allowed. CR No.6747 of 2009 (O&M) 2 The impugned order reads as under:- “No evidence of plaintiff is present. Summons of PW Clerk Housing Bord Haryana, Faridabad received back unserved. Adjournment sought out without showing any reasonable cause. Today it was last opportunity . Evidence of plaintiff is closed by court order. Now case is adjourned to 05.10.2009 for DWs, if any, and for arguments” Thus, the perusal of the impugned order reveals that the plaintiff was not at fault. He had summoned the Clerk of the Housing Board Haryana Faridabad and the summons had been received back unserved. The adjournments sought by the petitioner could not be said to without any reasonable cause. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be in the interest of justice to allow one opportunity to the petitioner to conclude her evidence so that lis between the parties can be decided on merits. Moreover, the other side can be compensated with costs. Accordingly, this revision petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 18.8.2009 is set aside. The trial Court is directed to grant one opportunity to the petitioner to lead her evidence at her own risk and responsibility subject to payment of Rs.1500/- as costs and adjourn the case on 20.11.2009 for petitioner's evidence. Thereafter, the trial Court shall proceed further in accordance with law. ( Sabina ) Judge November 18, 2009 arya