Civil Revision No.701 of 2010 -1- *** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.701 of 2010 Date of decision: 19.9.2011 Smt. Ramwati ...Petitioner Versus L.P.Singh and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. Sandeep Roy, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Sandeep Chhabra, Advocate for respondent no.1. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. Defendant no.2-petitioner has approached this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer that order dated 29.9.2009 passed by the Trial Court whereby evidence of the petitioner has been closed by order may be set aside and an opportunity may be granted to the petitioner-defendant no.2 to lead evidence in support of her defence taken in the written statement. Plaintiff-respondent no.1 filed a suit for specific performance of agreement and possession with consequential relief of permanent injunction. The petitioner had taken the plea that she had purchased the property in dispute from defendant no.1 and is a bonafide purchaser of the land in question. Inspite of several opportunities having been granted to the petitioner by the Trial Court, she has failed to conclude her evidence. Learned counsel for the petitioner-defendant no.2 submitted that it was due to certain unavoidable circumstances that the evidence could not be produced. It was urged that in the interest of justice one Civil Revision No.701 of 2010 -2- *** opportunity may be granted to petitioner-defendant no.2 to lead her entire evidence and the respondent-plaintiff can be compensated by way of costs. He further stated that petitioner-defendant no.2 will conclude her entire evidence at her own risk and responsibility on the date to be fixed by the Trial Court. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent supported the order passed by the trial Court. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is satisfied that in the interest of justice, the petitioner-defendant no.2 deserves to be granted one opportunity to conclude her evidence. Accordingly, the revision petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner-defendant no.2 shall be granted one date to lead her entire evidence on the date to be fixed by the trial Court at her own risk and responsibility and subject to payment of ` 5000/- to the respondent- plaintiff as costs. It is, however, made clear that in case the petitioner- defendant no.2 fails to conclude her entire evidence on the date to be fixed by the trial Court or to pay the costs, as stipulated above, this revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. September 19, 2011 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) Pka Judge