IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.207 of 2010 Date of decision : June 21, 2010 Gopal Singh …Petitioner. Versus Karam Singh and others …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashwani Pathak, Advocate. For the Respondents : Nemo. Surjit Singh, J (Oral) The present petition is directed against the order dated 7th June, 2010 of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karsog, whereby petitioner’s, who is a defendant, requests for adjournment of the case for producing documents, most of which are per se admissible, had been rejected, on the ground that despite last opportunity having been granted to him (the petitioner), he did not care to produce the documents. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the order. 3. Four documents are sought to be tendered in evidence by the petitioner. Three of them are per se admissible and fourth one is a patta (certificate of grant), which can also be tendered in evidence, without examining any witness, unless objected to by the other side. Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the copies of the documents were required to be procured from the Revenue Agency and now those copies have been supplied to the petitioner-defendant by the concerned Agency. 5. In view of the abovestated position, the present petition is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner shall be afforded one more opportunity to produce the documents, within a period of 15 days from the date of the passing of this order. Petition stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of, as having become infructuous. Copy of the order be given dasti, today itself. June 21, 2010(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J