- (1.) THE present petition has been filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs challenging the order 24.1.2011 passed by the Civil Judge, (JD) Kishangarhbas, Alwar (hereinafter referred as the "trial court") in the Civil Suit No.131 of 1994, whereby the trial court had closed the right of the petitioners-plaintiffs to lead evidence, and also challenging the order dated 29.3.2011 passed by the trial court rejecting the application of the petitioners for reopening their evidence.
(2.) IN the instant case, it appears that though the petitioners-plaintiffs were given sufficient opportunity to lead their evidence, they did not examine the witnesses and when the court had granted the last opportunity to keep the witnesses present on 24.1.2011, the petitioners failed to produce any witness and therefore the trial court closed the right of the petitioners to lead evidence. Subsequently, the petitioners submitted an application for reopening of their evidence on the ground that on 24.1.2011, the brother-in-law of one of the petitioners had suffered brain hemorrhage, who subsequently expired and therefore petitioners could not examine the witnesses on 24.1.2011. The said application has been rejected by the trial court by the impugned order dated 29.3.2011. The learned counsel for the respondents-defendants has submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial court as sufficient opportunity was given to the petitioners by the trial court to lead their evidence. It is true that the after granting number of opportunities, the petitioners were given last chance to keep the witnesses present on 24.1.2012, however they did not examine any witness on that day on the ground that one of the petitioners' near relative had suffered brain hemorrhage who subsequently expired. It is true that it was the duty of concerned counsel appearing for the petitioners-plaintiffs to inform the court as to for what reasons, the petitioners had not produced the witness on the date fixed by the court and that there is no illegality committed by the trial court in passing the impugned orders, nonetheless, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners are granted one more opportunity to lead their evidence in the interest of justice,subject to the payment of cost of Rs.5,000/-.
(3.) IN view of the above, the impugned orders dated 24.1.2011 and 29.3.2011 passed by the trial court are set aside. The petitioners-plaintiffs are given last opportunity to produce the witnesses on the date that may be fixed by the trial court in the first week of September,2012, subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to the respondents. It is clarified that if the petitioners do not examine the witnesses on the date fixed by the trial court, the trial court shall be at liberty to proceed with the suit in accordance with law. Petition stands allowed accordingly.;