IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2388 of 2009 Date of decision: 30.4.2009 Chander Bhan ......Petitioner Versus M/s. Raj Kumar & Company, Commission Agent ......Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Dalel Singh Nain, Advocate for the petitioner. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.(Oral) This is defendant's revision petition, challenging the order dated 15.4.2009 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Kaithal, whereby his evidence has been closed by order. Challenging the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the petitioner has been granted only three opportunities whereas the plaintiff-respondent has taken more than two years to conclude its evidence. It is also the case of the petitioner that he needs only one more opportunity to lead his evidence at his own risk and responsibility. As per the record of this revision petition, the present suit was instituted on 12.5.2005 and issues were framed on 16.3.2006. Thereafter the plaintiff-respondent led its evidence which was closed on 3.10.2008 and the case was fixed for evidence of the defendant-petitioner for the first time on 8.1.2009 and subsequently, the case stood adjourned to 24.3.2009 and then on 15.4.2009, the date when the impugned order was passed. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner to lead his entire evidence at his CR No.2388 of 2009 -2- own risk and responsibility subject to payment of costs which are assessed at Rs.2,000/- It is made clear that the payment of costs shall be a condition predecent. In any case, no further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner to conclude his evidence. The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on the date fixed i.e. 4.5.2009. On that date, the trial Court shall fix a further date to enable the petitioner to bring his entire evidence as per the opportunity granted by this Court. With the aforesaid observations, this revision petition is disposed of. April 30, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE