Narendra Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) ADMIT .
(2.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties. Plaintiff -respondent No. 1 filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 22,47,080/ - against the defendant -petitioner in the trial court in 2004, wherein the plaintiff's evidence was closed on 1st May, 2007, and the case was fixed for defendant's evidence for 11th May, 2007. The defendant filed an affidavit of Sawai Singh on 21st May, 2007. The case was adjourned for 21st May, 2007 and on that date an application under Order 16 Rule 1 CPC was filed, which was allowed and the order was passed to summon three witnesses. The case was adjourned for 3rd July, 2007, then for 12th July, 2007 and 21st July, 2007, but no witness was examined on behalf of the defendants. However, on 9th August, 2007 the statement of DW -1 Sawai Singh was recorded. The case was again fixed for defendant's evidence on 5th September, 2007, 22nd September, 2007, 26th October, 2007, 15th November, 2007, 15th December, 2007, 25th January, 2008, 21st February, 2008, 24th March, 2008 and 15th April, 2008, but the defendant did not lead its evidence. The defendant moved an application that he will produce one more witness Shri R.K. Gupta at his own. The application was opposed by the plaintiff but the trial court allowed the same at the cost of Rs. 1000/ -, and fixed the case for 3rd May, 2008. The defendant examined DW -2 Sohan Singh on 3rd May, 2008 and again moved an application that defendant wants to examine one more witness, therefore, the case be adjourned. The trial court rejected the application and closed the evidence of the defendant by observing that neither the name of the witness has been mentioned in the application nor any medical -certificate to prove that witness is ill has been filed along -with the application.
(3.) THE said order is under challenge in this writ petition preferred on behalf of the defendant. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that his one witness was not well, therefore, the application was moved which should have been allowed by the trial court but the application was wrongly dismissed, therefore, one more opportunity may be granted to the defendant to produce his witness.;