Lachman Singh vs Niranjan Singh and Others

Jaswant Singh, J.—Plaintiff/Petitioner has filed the instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing order dated 21.9.2010 (P1) passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Balachaur, whereby the evidence of the Petitioner has been closed by court order.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner prays that Plaintiff/Petitioner be granted one last opportunity to lead his entire evidence subject to such costs as this Court may deem appropriate.

After hearing the learned Counsel and going through the various zimni orders reproduced in the revision petition, I find no ground to accept the prayer made on behalf of the Plaintiff/Petitioner.

It is not disputed that Plaintiff/Petitioner availed as many as seven opportunities for leading his evidence before his evidence was closed by Court order. A perusal of the zimni order dated 1.9.2010 reveals that on that date counsel for the Plaintiff/Petitioner had made a statement that he would produce Plaintiff''s evidence on the next date, failing which the same shall be deemed to be closed by order. In view of that statement made by the learned Counsel for the Plaintiff/Petitioner, he was granted one last opportunity to conclude his evidence. It was further ordered that in case of failure of Plaintiff/Petitioner to conclude his evidence on the next date his evidence will be closed by court order. Thereafter the case was fixed for 21.9.2010 for the remaining evidence of the Plaintiff/Petitioner. On 21.9.2010 cross examination of witness Lachman Singh was concluded and besides that Plaintiff tendered some documents in his evidence. Since no other PW was present and Plaintiff/Petitioner sought some more time to conclude his evidence, the learned trial Court in view of the last opportunity granted in terms of the undertaking given by the learned Counsel for the Plaintiff/Petitioner on 1.9.2010, closed the evidence of the Plaintiff/Petitioner by court order.

In view of the fact that it was very much within the knowledge of the Plaintiff/Petitioner that 21.9.2010 he was to conclude his entire evidence failing which the same shall be closed by court order and still he failed to take necessary steps to conclude his evidence, in my opinion, Petitioner does not deserve any further indulgence by this Court to grant him one last opportunity even on payment of costs, moreso having already availed seven opportunities.

For the reasons stated above, finding no merit in this revision petition the same is hereby dismissed.