CR No.7238 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.7238 of 2009 Date of Decision: 8.12.2009 Smt. Salma ..Petitioner. Vs. Mohd.Riaz ..Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.A.K.Garg, Advocate for the petitioner. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 28.10.2009 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr.Divn.), Malerkotla whereby evidence of the plaintiff has been closed. Counsel for the petitioner submits that issues were framed on 27.3.2009 and the case was adjourned for 14.5.2009 for evidence of the plaintiff. On 14.5.2009 neither any PW was present nor was summoned, however, case was adjourned for 22.9.2009 with a direction that plaintiff shall supply copy of the affidavits of PWs to the opposite counsel. On 22.9.2009 neither any PW was present nor the plaintiff had supplied affidavits of the PWs to the counsel opposite and the case was adjourned to 28.10.2009. On 28.10.2009, the Court had found that only one PW was present and examined. Prayer was made by the plaintiff for adjournment which was opposed and as such the learned trial Court closed the evidence of the plaintiff after observing that sufficient opportunities have already been granted. Counsel for the petitioner has, inter alia, argued that in the suit CR No.7238 of 2009 -2- for recovery filed on the basis of pronote, the petitioner had to examine two remaining witnesses i.e. scribe and one marginal witness. He undertakes to examine both the witnesses on the next date of hearing i.e. 16.12.2009 subject to payment of costs. After hearing the counsel for the petitioner and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is allowed and order dated 28.10.2009 is hereby set aside. One last opportunity is granted to the petitioner to examine his witnesses on 16.12.2009 subject to payment of Rs.5000/- as costs. It is made clear that if the cost is not paid then the present petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. (Rakesh Kumar Jain) 8.12.2009 Judge Meenu