PREM LATA Vs. RAM SARUP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE order dated 12.9.2005, evidence of the petitioner-plaintiff was closed by order. Counsel contends that petitioner needs only one opportunity to complete her entire evidence. Counsel informs this Court that the petitioner only intended to place on record some documents, which are per se admissible. He, by stating above mentioned facts, prays that may be, subject to payment of costs, one opportunity be granted to the petitioner to produce her entire evidence, as stated above, at her own risk and responsibility. It is apparent from records that the suit is for declaration, claiming ownership over the property, in dispute. This Court feels that if the petitioner is not allowed to complete her evidence, an irreparable loss is likely to be caused to her. Rules and procedure are handmaid of justice to enhance the same and not to subvert it.

(2.) THEIR Lordships of Supreme Court in Sardar Amarjit Singh Kalra (dead) by L.Rs. and others v. Parmod Gupta (Smt.) (dead) by L.Rs. and others, (2003)3 S.C.C. 272, in para 26 of the judgment had opined as under :-

(3.) IN view of facts and circumstances of this case, revision petition is allowed, order under challenge is set aside, trial Court is directed to give one more opportunity to the petitioner, to complete her evidence, by bringing on record necessary documents. Order passed is subject to payment of Rs. 2,000/-, as costs, to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent on the date fixed before the trial Court. It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to avail the opportunity granted by this Court, the revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed.