PREM CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition is filed challenging the order dated 2.2.2010 passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Panchkula, whereby evidence of the plaintiff-petitioner was directed to be closed.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that on the date fixed by this Court or by the learned trial Court remaining plaintiff?s witnesses shall be produced before the learned trial Court for the examination and no adjournment shall be sought.

(3.) Keeping in mind the golden rule that none of the parties should be given walkover and lis between the parties, as far as possible, should be decided at its own merit after giving sufficient opportunities to both the parties to place on record entire evidence and material, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I direct learned trial Court to fix any date for the plaintiff?s remaining evidence. On the date so fixed by the learned trial Court, plaintiff shall produce all the witnesses before the learned trial Court. If examination is not complete on the said date, then learned trial Court shall be at liberty to hold day to day trial or to fix any other date which is convenient to the learned trial Court to complete the examination of the witnesses. However, it is made clear that no adjournment shall be granted to the plaintiff-petitioner to produce witnesses. Petitioner/plaintiff shall pay Rs.5000/- as costs to the defendants-respondents.