SURESH JAIN Vs. ADDL. DISTT. JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this instant writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 16.7.2012 by which the evidence of the plaintiff-petitioner was closed by the trial Court, in Civil Suit No.170/2005.

(2.) IT is submitted by Mr. Nitin Jain, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner filed a suit against the respondents in the year 2005. He further submitted that the petitioner had fallen ill, suffered brain hemorrhage somewhere in the year 2012 was rushed to Delhi and subsequently, he went in 'Coma'. In support of his claim, he has placed on record medical certificate not only of Hospital of Jaipur but also of Max Super Specialty Hospital, Delhi having super specialty facility at New Delhi. Therefore, in view of the said fact, he submitted that the petitioner was having sufficient cause for his non-appearance before the trial court and also for not giving his evidence before the trial Court and prays that one last opportunity may be granted to the petitioner by considering the aforesaid fact of his illness which prevented him from appearance, so that he can give his evidence. He also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Amrit Lal Kapoor and Another Vs. Kusum Lata Kapoor and Others,(2010)6 SCC 583, and the Judgments of this Court in the Case of Satyanarayan Vs. Govind Prasad WLC 2007 (3)(Raj) 323, Khem Das Vs. state of Rajasthan and Another RLW 1999 (2) Raj. 1255 and also a decision of this Court rendered in the Case of Kailash Chandra Vs. Addl. Civil Judge (JD) Jaipur Metropolitan and Anr. SB Civil Writ Petition No.20895/2012 decided on 8.2.2013.

(3.) I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the material on record as well as the order impugned. After going through the material on record as well as the impugned order, while there is no conflict that not more than three opportunities can be granted but in the present case illness being such that I consider it just and proper to provide one last opportunity to the plaintiff-petitioner looking to the fact stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has suffered brain hemorrhage, he was rushed to Delhi and thereafter, he went in 'Coma' as a result of which he could not give his evidence before the trial Court well in time, this according to me is a just and sufficient cause shown by the learned counsel for the petitioner for his non-appearance before the trial Court. The prescription of Doctors/Hospitals cannot be brushed aside.