RAMINDER CHIMNI AND ANR. Vs. NIRMLA AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 3.11.2010 passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Gurgaon, Annexure P1, vide which evidence of Petitioner -Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 in the suit was closed.

(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the Petitioners and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned trial Court.

(3.) REPORT was called from learned trial court in this regard. Report has been received from trial Court, wherein it has been mentioned that expenses for summoning the witnesses by Defendant were not deposited. Hence, summons could not be issued. There is no force in the argument of learned Counsel for the Petitioners that there was lapse on the part of learned trial Court for not issuing summons to the witnesses. Rather a wrong plea has been taken on behalf of Petitioner -Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 that summons were not issued despite deposit of requisite expenses. After filing of application for summoning of the witnesses on 14.8.2010, the case was adjourned to 4.9.2010 for evidence, when no witness was present. Last opportunity was granted by learned trial Court for 25.9.2010, on which date as well no witness of Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 were present. Again Defendant Nos. 1 and 2 were given an opportunity to deposit the process fee and diet money etc. for summoning witnesses and the case was adjourned to 3.11.2010, making it another last opportunity. However, despite that neither the expenses were deposited nor any witnesses was present and hence, learned trial Court was constrained to pass the following order, dated 3.11.2010: