MANI RAM Vs. AVINASH KUMAR AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 14.08.2010 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Abohar, whereby an adjournment sought by the plaintiff - petitioner was refused and evidence of the plaintiff was directed to be closed.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the plaintiff - petitioner states that on the next date as fixed by this Court or by the learned Trial Court, entire remaining evidence shall be produced before the learned Trial Court. He further states that the dasti summons shall be taken out to summon the witness at his own risk.

(3.) In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in mind, the golden rule that none should be given walk over and lis between the parties, as far as possible, should be decided on merit after giving sufficient opportunities to both the parties to place on record entire evidence and material, I direct that learned Trial Court shall fix one date for the purpose of remaining evidence of the petitioner. On the date so fixed by the learned Trial Court, petitioner shall produce the witness before the Court. If, for any reason, examination is not complete on the date so fixed, then learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to hold day-to-day trial or fix any future date, which is convenient to the Court. However, it is made clear that dasti summon shall be served to the witness to be summoned at the risk of the petitioner. Case shall not be adjourned on the ground that despite of the service of the dasti summon, witness is not present. Plaintiff - petitioner shall pay Rs. 2000/- as costs to the defendants.