- (1.) This plaintiffs' revision is directed against the order dated March 15th, 2012 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dhuri whereby evidence of the petitioners was closed. Learned counsel for the petitioners has, inter-alia, urged that the petitioners' one witness was present on the date fixed and he was examined. For the remaining evidence, the petitioners filed an application on March 15th, 2012 and the trial Judge passed the following order:- One PW is present and examined. No other PW is present. The plaintiff has failed to conclude her entire evidence despite availing five effective opportunities and despite warning her about the last and final opportunities. It was contended by ld. Counsel for plaintiff that he had filed an application for preparation of excerpt by Patwar Moharrir, who could not prepare the excerpt in time, but record shows that application for depositing of excerpt fee was filed on 5.3.2012 i.e. 10 days before this order, whereas case was adjourned from 21.1.2012 to this date. Despite period of three months, plaintiff is unable to put forth any sincere and genuine efforts in this regard and keeping in view her act and conduct, I do not find any merit in the contentions raised by ld. Counsel for plaintiff for further adjournment, nor I find any justification to adjourn the case for evidence of plaintiff. Accordingly, evidence of plaintiff is closed by order. On request, adjourned to 5.4.2012 for evidence of defendants. PF/DM/List of witnesses be produced within 7 days.
(2.) In view of the order passed, the evidence of the petitioners should not have been closed rather the case should have been adjourned for awaiting the excerpt duly prepared by the revenue authorities.
(3.) Be that as it may, learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that he be granted one opportunity to lead evidence mentioned in the order dated March 15th, 2012 and that too, on their own responsibility on the date fixed, that is, April 5th, 2012.;