JASWINDER SINGH Vs. INDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE the impugned order, defendant's evidence was closed under Order 17 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 9.5.2000 and the case was posted for plaintiffs' rebuttal evidence and arguments for today i.e. 11.5.2000.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that otherwise also there was no warrant for the closure of defendant's evidence when the defendant had summoned the concerned clerk of the Electricity Department and had deposited the necessary diet money for him.

(3.) IF the Court was to adjourn the case from 9.5.2000, the Court should have adjourned the case for defendant's evidence and plaintiffs rebuttal evidence or else the Court should have decided the case there and then on 9.5.2000. For this view, I am supported by a judgment reported as 1978(1)Rent Law Reporter 380.