- (1.) Prayer in the present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is for setting aside of order dated 22.3.2012 passed by the learned court below, vide which evidence of the plaintiff was closed by order of the Court.
(2.) The proceedings in the present case arise out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 3,00,000/- filed by the petitioner/plaintiff against the respondents.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that one Balvir Singh was the customer of the plaintiff and he took a cash loan. After the death of Balvir Singh, the respondents have inherited his estate. To recover the loan amount, the plaintiff/petitioner has filed the present suit, which is now being contested by the respondents. After filing of written statement, the issues were framed and the case was fixed for evidence of the petitioner on 22.1.2010. Thereafter, the case remained pending for different dates of hearing but the witnesses could not be examined as either the witness of the plaintiff was not present or Presiding officer was on leave or lawyers were on strike and on account of pendency of application under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC. On 7.10.2011, examination-in-chief of three witnesses was recorded, however, their cross-examination was deferred for 14.1.2012 on the request of counsel for the defendants/respondents. On 14.1.2012, cross-examination of PW2 Shiv Dayal was concluded and the case was adjourned to 27.2.2012, on which date also the witness could not be examined and the case was adjourned to 22.3.2012, on which date the learned court below passed the impugned order closing the evidence of the petitioner. It was submitted that examination-in-chief of PW1 Nitya Nand and PW2 Shiv Dayal has already been recorded and only their cross-examination is left and for that one effective opportunity be granted. The evidence of the defendants is yet to start.;