J.S.Khehar, J.

1. Vide order dated 23.5.1998, the petitioner-defendant was allowed one last opportunity to lead his evidence by adjourning the case to 24.7.1998. On 24.7.1998, no witness appeared on behalf of the petitioner-defendant. The learned Trial Court relying heavily on the fact that the petitioner-defendant was afforded one last opportunity to conclude his evidence at his own risk and responsibility, ordered the defence of the petitioner-defendant to be closed, since no witness appeared on 24.7.1998. It is undoubtedly true that the petitioner-defendant had expressly undertaken to lead evidence at his own risk and responsibility. However, a perusal of the order shows that the witness who remains to be examined i.e. Giani Ram is the Area Patwari. The deposition of the aforesaid witness obviously is based on official record. The petitioner-defendant could not have persuaded the said Giani Ram to appear on his behalf. It is in these circumstances that diet money and process fee was duly deposited by the petitioner-defendant so as to summon the said witness. The summons issued to Shri Giani Ram, Area Patwari, could not be served upon him as per the report of the Process