Civil Revision No. 4834 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 4834 of 2009 Date of decision:14th September, 2009 Jarnail Singh .......Petitioner Versus Shyam Lal .......Respondent Before: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA Present: Mr. Mahesh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vijay Sharma, Advocate for the respondent. Rajive Bhalla, J. The petitioner challenges the orders dated 21.10.2008 and 08.06.2009, passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Moonak. Counsel for the petitioner submits that on 30.07.2008, the trial court passed an order, that in case the petitioner fails to lead evidence on 15.09.2008, his evidence would be deemed to be closed. It is submitted that as the Presiding Officer was on leave on 15.09.2008, the case was adjourned to 21.10.2008. On the said date, the petitioner could not produce his evidence, on account of inadvertent error on his part and therefore, his evidence was closed by order. It is further submitted that the petitioner filed an application for additional evidence, which was dismissed on 8.06.2009. Counsel for the petitioner prays that Civil Revision No. 4834 of 2009 2 one last opportunity be granted to the petitioner, to lead his entire evidence at his own risk and responsibility, subject to payment of such costs, as this court may deem appropriate. It is prayed that in case the petitioner is not allowed to lead evidence, the suit for recovery would be decreed without taking into consideration, a substantial part of his defence. Counsel for the respondent however, submits that the suit was filed on 19.09.2005. The petitioner has succeeded in delaying the disposal of the suit, by praying for unnecessary adjournments. It is argued that no further opportunity should be granted to the petitioner. I have heard counsel for the parties, perused the order dated 30.07.2008, 21.10.2008 and 8.06.2009. Though the petitioner may have been negligent in his obligation to lead his evidence expeditiously but closure of his evidence by order, would necessarily cause serious prejudice to his defence. As a consequence, the orders dated 30.7.2008 and 21.10.2008 are set aside and the trial court is directed to grant one opportunity to the petitioner to lead his entire evidence, by grant of dasti summons for the next date of hearing i.e. 5.10.2009. It is made clear that no further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner and in case, he fails to lead any evidence on 5.10.2009, his evidence shall be deemed to have been closed by order. The opportunity granted to the petitioner is however, subject to the payment of Rs. 10,000/- as costs. It Civil Revision No. 4834 of 2009 3 would be necessary to mention here that as the order, closing the petitioner’s evidence has been set aside, the application for additional evidence and the order passed thereon, dated 8.06.2009, have been rendered infructuous. [RAJIVE BHALLA] JUDGE 14th September, 2009 SKaushik