Civil Revision No. 3843 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 3843 of 2010 Date of Decision: June 02, 2010 Habib alias Ajit ...... Petitioner Versus Abbas Ali and another ...... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr.Maharaj Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Ajay Tewari, J. This petition has been filed against an order closing the evidence of the petitioner-plaintiff on the ground that on the date fixed neither costs were paid nor the evidence was present. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that in fact instead of noting the date as 22.04.2010 learned counsel for the petitioner had wrongly noted the date as 30.04.2010 and that is the only reason why evidence could not be led on that date. He has further relied upon an affidavit executed by the counsel which has corroborated this fact. Further states that on 14.05.2010 which was the date initially fixed for the evidence of the respondent-defendants no evidence was led and the matter is now Civil Revision No. 3843 of 2010 2 fixed for 12.06.2010 and he says that in case the petitioner is a\permitted to lead his entire evidence at his own responsibility on 12.06.2010 the same would advance the cause of justice and that any prejudice which may have been caused to the respondents can be compensated by way of costs. In view of these assertions, in my opinion it would be in the interest of justice if the petitioner is permitted to lead his entire evidence at his own responsibility subject to costs of Rs.5000/- to be paid by two demand drafts of Rs. 2500/- each in favour of respondents No.1 and 2- defendants. Petition is allowed in the above terms. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE June 02, 2010 sunita