137 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision:22.12.2025

AMIT KUMAR ...Petitioner

Vs.

INDRA KAUSHAL NOW DECEASED THROUGH HER LR NEHA

KAUSHAL ...Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRINDER AGGARWAL

Present: Mr. Arshjot Singh Mohi, Advocate

for the petitioner.

VIRINDER AGGARWAL , J. ( Oral)

1. The present civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 151 CPC assailing the order dated 05.12.2025 (Annexure P-8), vide which defense of the predecessor-in-

interest of petitioner has been struck off.

2. The respondent filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,58,000/-, which was contested by the petitioner by filing a written statement. The petitioner proceeded to lead his defense evidence, which, however, was closed vide the impugned order. The petitioner respectfully seeks the indulgence of this Court

for the grant of one effective opportunity to conclude his evidence.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone

through the records carefully.

4. A careful perusal of the paper-book reveals that the petitioner was granted ample and repeated opportunities by the learned Civil Judge to conclude the defense evidence. Despite being afforded more than twenty occasions to complete the evidence, the petitioner failed to do so. It is further noteworthy that the Court had specifically imposed a condition of payment of

costs for the adjournment of the petitioner’s evidence on 01.12.2025; however, the same remained unpaid. In view of the petitioner’s inability to conclude the evidence despite repeated opportunities and non-compliance with the cost order, the learned Civil Judge, vide order dated 05.12.2025, closed the evidence of the petitioner. Impugned order is reproduced herein for ready reference:

“No evidence of defendant is present. An application for adjournment filed by applicant through his father, which is opposed.

Perusal of record shows that plaintiff has already closed his evidence on 07.11.2024 and case was fixed for evidence of defendant. Sine then twenty effective opportunities have been availed by defendant to conclude his evidence but has failed to do so.

Sh. Sunil Pabreja Adv counsel for defendant also suffered statement on 19.08.2025 wherein given under taking to conclude evidence of defendant but has failed to do so. Hence I find no justification to adjourn the case further for the same purpose. No request for further adjournment is made. Hence evidence of defendants is closed by order.

Now, case is adjourned to 12.12.2025 for arguments.”

5. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, it is observed that the learned Civil Judge has not committed any illegality or perversity in closing the evidence of the petitioner-defendant. The petitioner- defendant was granted ample opportunities to lead his evidence, and the closure was in accordance with the principles of law. However, since the petitioner-defendant has sought one final opportunity to conclude the entire evidence, it is, in the interest of justice, directed that one effective opportunity shall be granted to him to complete the evidence. This opportunity is granted subject to the petitioner-defendant making a payment of costs amounting to Rs. 10,000/-, of which Rs. 5,000/- shall be paid to the respondent/plaintiff, and the remaining Rs. 5,000/- shall be deposited in the account of the District Legal Services Authority, Patiala.

6. With the directions above, the present petition is disposed of (VIRINDER AGGARWAL)

JUDGE

22.12.2025 kv