Civil Revision No.275 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision No.275 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 25, 2011 Inder Singh .....Petitioner v. Sube Singh and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.R.N.Lohan, Advocate for Mr.S.K.Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) C.M.No.1164-CII of 2011 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. C.M.No.4954-CII of 2011 Requests for placing on record zimni orders passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rewari. The same are taken on record subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of accordingly. Civil Revision No.275 of 2011 The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 25.11.2010, passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rewari, (hereinafter to be referred as the `Tribunal') vide which evidence of the petitioner has been closed. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned Tribunal. Perusal of all the previous orders and the impugned order passed by learned Tribunal shows that sufficient opportunities were availed by the petitioner to adduce evidence. It remained unexplained as to why he did not get himself examined as a witness despite so many opportunities. Civil Revision No.275 of 2011 (O&M) -2- However, it has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner being a police official was on emergency duty and that is why, he could not appear on the last date of hearing when his evidence was closed. Hence, though it cannot be said that any illegality or material irregularity has been committed by learned Tribunal in closing the evidence of the petitioner, however, in view of the fact that it is a claim petition and petitioner wants to examine himself only as his own witness and that he does not want to lead any other evidence, one opportunity can be granted to the petitioner and the other party can be compensated by way of cost. As a sequel to my above discussion, the present revision petition is accepted. Impugned order is set aside to the extent of closing the evidence of the petitioner. Learned Tribunal is directed to give one opportunity to the petitioner to examine himself as his own witness subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as cost, which shall be a condition precedent. Disposed of accordingly. 25.2.2011 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge