Mahesh Bhagwati, J. - (1.) CHALLENGE in this writ petition is to the order dated 13.7.2007, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Neem Ka Thana, closed the evidence of the plaintiffs -petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners plaintiff canvassed that the learned trial court sans assigning any cogent reason closed their evidence, hence the order of the learned trial court being arbitrary deserves to be set -aside. Learned counsel, however, prayed that in the interest of justice, one and the last opportunity may be granted to the plaintiff -petitioners to produce their evidence.
(2.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record, it is noticed that the learned trial court closed the evidence of the plaintiff -petitioners on the ground that issues were framed on 21.3.2006 and dates 18.4.2006, 1.5.2006, 17.7.2006 and 4.8.2006 were fixed for recording the evidence. The affidavits of the witnesses Keshar, Hoshiyar and Bodu were produced on 4.8.2006. On 13.7.2007, neither the witnesses appeared before the court nor any reason was assigned for their non appearance. The approach of the learned trial court seems to be genuine. However, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, I deem just and proper to grant one and the last opportunity to the petitioners -plaintiff to produce their entire evidence on the next date of hearing subject to the payment of cost of Rs. 2000/ -, which shall be paid to the respondents -defendants. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and the order dated 13.7.2007 is set aside.
(3.) THE learned trial court is directed to allow the petitioners -plaintiffs to produce their entire evidence subject to the payment of cost of Rs. 2000/ - to the respondents -defendant. It is made clear that the evidence of the plaintiff -petitioners shall be recorded by the learned trial court only after the amount of cost of Rs. 2,000/ - is paid by the petitioners -plaintiff.;