Civil Revision No.1089 of 2011(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision No.1089 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: February 16, 2011 Jeet Ram and another .....Petitioners v. Puran Singh .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.Veneet Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioners. ..... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) C.M.No.4630-CII of 2011 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Civil Revision No.1089 of 2011 The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 28.1.2011, passed by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ambala, vide which the evidence of the petitioner-defendants has been closed. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned trial Court. Facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction against the petitioner-defendants restraining them from interfering, in any manner, into his possession of the property in dispute, duly described in the heading of the plaint. Suit was contested by petitioner-defendants. Issues were framed. Evidence of plaintiff was closed and the case was fixed for evidence of petitioner-defendants on 18.1.2011 and however, as on 18.1.2011, the Court was on leave, the case was adjourned to 24.1.2011 for the same purpose, when part evidence of petitioner-defendants was recorded and the case was Civil Revision No.1089 of 2011(O&M) -2- adjourned to 28.1.2011, when the impugned order closing evidence of petitioner-defendants was passed. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner- defendants that petitioners are old persons of more than 70 years of age and that only two opportunities were granted to them and hence, it is contended that one more opportunity be granted to them to lead their evidence at their own responsibility and that they undertake to close the evidence after availing one opportunity. Hence, in view of these facts, the present revision petition is accepted. Impugned order dated 28.1.2011 passed by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amabala, is set aside. Learned trial Court is directed to give one effective opportunity to petitioner-defendants to adduce their entire evidence at their own responsibility, subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as cost, which shall be a condition precedent. Disposed of accordingly. 16.2.2011 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge