Shree Chandrashekhar, J. - (1.) At the outset, it needs to be recorded that order dated 12.10.2017 has not been complied by the petitioners, though at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners for complying order dated 12.10.2017, on 17.11.2017 further time was granted.
(2.) Aggrieved of order dated 13.08.2009 passed in Title Suit No.3 of 2007 by which an application for recall of order dated 03.06.2009 has been declined, the petitioners (petitioner No.2 Gondiya Devi, wife of Teklal Mahto wrongly made petitioner in the present proceeding), have approached this Court.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner No. 1 submits that the petitioner No. 1 on account of circumstances beyond his control could not appear in the pending suit on the date fixed and consequently cross-examination could not be done. Referring to the medical certificates vide Annexures-1 to 5, the learned counsel for the petitioner No. 1 would submit that the petitioner No. 1 who was seriously ill and was advised bed-rest could not have appeared for his cross-examination, however, these facts have been ignored by the trial Judge and the plaintiffs' evidence was closed illegally.;