KULDIP CHAND Vs. K C KIRPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the impugned order, evidence of the petitioners has been ordered to be closed as the petitioners have failed to produce the evidence despite several opportunities granted to them. Counsel for the petitioners argued that out of the list of witnesses submitted by them, Clerk of the Improvement Trust, Town Planning Department, Amritsar and Clerk of the Office of Sub-Registrar, Amritsar, have to appear with record and they can only be summoned through the process of Court so far as other witnesses are concerned petitioners are prepared to bring them at their own risk and responsibility on a date to be fixed by the trial Court.

(2.) In the interest of justice, this revision petition is allowed, the impugned order of the trial Court is set aside and the petitioners are given one more opportunity to produce their evidence at their own risk and responsibility. Apart from the official witnesses, referred to above, petitioners shall produce their entire evidence at their own risk and responsibility on a date to be fixed by the trial Court. So far as the official witnesses are concerned, they be summoned through the process of Court. Petitioners shall take Dasti summons to effect service on these witnesses. It is made clear that petitioners would not be granted more than one opportunity to produce their entire evidence. Parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the trial Court on 17.5.1995 on which date the trial Court shall fix a date for recording evidence of the petitioners as indicated above. Petitioners shall be liable to pay Rs. 1,000/- as costs which they shall deposit before the trial Court on the date fixed by this Court.