Honble SAXENA, J. – Heard. Perused the impugned Oder dated 23.7.94 passed by the Additional District Judge N0. 2 Alwar , in civil suit No. 123/89, , whereby he closed the evidence of the plaintiff -petitioner as it had failed to pay the cost for adjournment u/s,35-B CPC. The petitioner bank filed a civil suit against the defemdant for recovery of Rs. 3,10,931/- In the suit, 28/4/94 was fixed for the plaintiffs evidence and an adjournment was sought on behalf of the petitioner for examining other witnesses . Therefore , the case was adjourned to 15/7.94 on a cost of Rs. 100/-. On 15.7.94 the petitioner could not make payment of the cost and an objection was taken on behalf of the non-petitioners under Section 35(B) CPC and the case was adjourned to 21.7.94. On that date the petitioner-Bank produced a pay order of Rs. 100/- towards cost but the non-petitioners refused to accept the same and insisted the lower court not to allow the petitioner to participate in the proceedings. The learned trial court by the impugned order dated 23.7.94 precluded the petitioner from producing its evidence on the ground that it had failed to make payment of the cost on 15.7.94 .Hence this revision peti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document