IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.5016 of 2010 Date of decision: 11th August, 2010 Navraj Dheer … Petitioner Versus Rajinder Kumar … Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Tarun Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Learned counsel contends that despite every effort having been made, the petitioner could not conclude his evidence, and the trial Court by closing the evidence vide order dated 2nd August, 2010, has caused grave prejudice to the petitioner. Be that as it may, fair play and equity demands that one opportunity ought to be granted to the petitioner-tenant to conclude his evidence on one day at his own risk and responsibility. Learned counsel submits that in case the Rent Controller, Panchkula affords one opportunity to the petitioner, he will examine two officials, one from ICICI Bank and the other from Kotak Mahindra Bank, after depositing the process fee and diet money and issuance of summons from the Court. Request is accepted. The Rent Controller, Panchkula is directed to afford one opportunity to the petitioner-tenant to examine two officials from the Banks, for which summons will be issued. Since the Civil Revision No.5016 of 2010 petitioner has not been vigilant to conclude his evidence, a cost of Rs.5,000/- is imposed upon him. With the observations made above, present revision petition is disposed of. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE August 11, 2010 rps 2