MOHINDER SINGH Vs. MOHINDER KAUR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside impugned order dated 9.2.2017 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jagadhri, Yamuna Nagar, whereby, evidence of the petitioner was closed by the order of the Court.

(2.) Briefly, the facts of the case as made out in the present petition are that respondent No.1 filed a civil suit against the petitioner and proforma respondents No.5 to 11 for declaration as joint owner of the land in dispute and also for consequential relief of joint possession and permanent injunction restraining the defendants from alienating the suit property. Written statement to the suit was filed. Plaintiff led his evidence and thereafter petitioner and proforma respondents also led their evidence and finally evidence of the petitioner and proforma respondents was closed by order of the Court vide order dated 9.2017, which is subject matter of challenge in the present revision petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that evidence of the petitioner has been closed by the order of the Court only on the ground that several effective opportunities were given but still evidence was not concluded. Learned counsel further submits that on 25.1.2017, the statement of expert witness could not be recorded because of suspension of work. On 9.2.2017, he could not appear before the trial Court as on that day he was busy in District Court at Chandigarh relating to case titled as State of U.T., Chandigarh Vs. Harjit Kaur. Learned counsel also submits that no injustice is going to be caused to the respondents in case one effective opportunity is granted to the petitioner to conclude his evidence. Learned counsel also undertakes to conclude the evidence of the petitioner within one effective opportunity.