RAGHBIR SINGH SAINI Vs. STATE BANK OF PATIALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order of the trial Court dated 22.8.1983 by which evidence of the defendant was closed on the ground that defendant No. 2 had earlier been given three opportunities to led evidence. The suit has been filed by the Bank for recovery of Rs. 76,428.17 P., which includes principal as well as inteest. It is not disputed before me by the learned counsel for the petitioner that three opportunities were granted but he has submitted that the interest of justice requires the grant of another opportunity. He has argued that the petitioner deposited expenses in the Court for summoning certain witnesses on 16.8.1983. He has further explained before this Court that the delay in filing the application for summoning the witnesses was casual because his counsel did not receive the intimation for summoning the witnesses. The petitioner reached Ambala on 18.8.1983 but was told by his counsel that the necessary information for summoning the witnesses was not received by him. The following witnesses were sought to be summoned on 18.8.83.

(2.) The above mentioned order clerly shows that the petitioner was not to bring the evidence on his own responsibility. Even otherwise, the witnesses summoned on 18.8.1983 were official witnesses and the petitioner could not possibly take it upon himself to produce them. In my view, the petitioner is entitled to the grant of another opportunity. All possible assistance would be given to him to summon the witnesses. Dasti procss would also be given.

(3.) The revision petition is consequently allowed with the aforementioned observations and the impugned order is quashed. The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the trial Court on 18.5.1990. The suit be preferably decided by the end of this year.