1 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10353/2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10353/2008 Digvijay Singh Versus Bhimsen Panjabi & Another. Date of Order: 16.12.2010 Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kumar Jain,J. Mr. Mahesh Gupta, for the petitioner. Mr. Akash Agarwal on behalf of Mr. Sanjay Singhal, for the respondent. BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 filed a suit for mandatory and permanent injunction in the trial court against defendant-petitioner. Plaintiff's evidence was closed in the case on 15.02.2007. Thereafter despite grant of four opportunities and grant of one opportunity on payment of cost of Rs. 1,00/- on 03.03.2008, the case was fixed for defendant's evidence on 2 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10353/2008 21.04.2008. Since evidence was not led, therefore, defendant's evidence was closed. Thereafter, defendant moved an application on 06.05.2008 to grant one more opportunity to defendant to lead evidence. The application was dismissed by Civil Judge(Junior Division), First Class, Atru, District Baran vide order dated 25.07.2008. Being aggrieved with the same, defendant has preferred this writ petition. 3. This Court while issuing notice to show cause to respondents on 22.09.2008, stayed the further proceedings of the trial court. 4. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner was a student of L.L.B. Second Year and had gone to participate in the examination from Barkatulla University, Bhopal, therefore, he could not make himself present on 21.04.2008. The cause shown by the petitioner was reasonable, therefore, one more opportunity should have been granted to the petitioner. Trial court committed an illegality in closing defendant's evidence and in rejecting his application vide order dated 25.07.2008, therefore, impugned order may be set aside and one more opportunity may be granted to the petitioner to lead his evidence. 3 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10353/2008 5. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that even before 21.04.2008, four opportunities were granted to the petitioner and one opportunity was granted on payment of cost, therefore, there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial court. However, he submitted that looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case, one more opportunity may be granted to the petitioner on payment of cost. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection in granting an opportunity to lead evidence on payment of cost. 7. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that ends of justice will meet in case one more opportunity is granted to defendant-petitioner to lead evidence on payment of cost. 8. Consequently, writ petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 25.07.2008 passed by trial court is set aside and one more opportunity is granted to defendant-petitioner to lead his evidence on payment of cost of Rs. 1,000/-. The petitioner is directed to lead all his evidence in the trial court on 17.01.2011 and 18.01.2011. 4 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10353/2008 It is made clear that in case payment of amount of cost is not made, then the petitioner will not be allowed to lead any evidence and no further opportunity in this regard will be granted to him. (Narendra Kumar Jain),J. Manoj, Item No.180.