SMT. KOYALI DEVI Vs. SMT. VIDHYA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - This is a revision petition against the order of learned Additional District Judge No. 2, Jaipur City, Jaipur dated 7.1.1999 by which the evidence of the plaintiff was closed as two witnesses of the plaintiff were not present on that date.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.

(3.) As suit for eviction of a shop and recovery of rent was filed by the plaintiff in the year 1992 on the ground of default and bona fide necessity as well as subletting. The suit proceeded and provisional rent was determined on 26.2.94. The evidence of the plaintiff could commence on 20.10.97 when statement of plaintiff was recorded. His another witness Sadhu Ram was examined on 19.8.98. His two witnesses remained to be examined and they are Phool Chand and Bhagwan Sahai. Various opportunities were taken but since they were ill they could not be produced and on the date of hearing when the evidence was closed, it was stated that Phool Chand had undergone eye operation and was discharged from the hospital but was not in a position to attend the court. It may be stated that though the evidence of plaintiff was closed on 8.10.98 but the trial Court had given further opportunity to produce the witnesses on 4.12.98 on which date no witness was present and hence the suit was adjourned to 7.1.99 when the witnesses were not present and ultimately the evidence of the plaintiff was closed.