1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:06.02.2026 Tara Singh ...Petitioner Versus Bank of India and Others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL Present: Mr. K.K. Goyal, Advocate for petitioner.

***

PARMOD GOYAL, J. (ORAL)

Petitioner-plaintiff is aggrieved by order dated 09.10.2025 (Annexure P-4), passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana vide which his evidence was closed as petitioner-plaintiff had failed to lead and conclude his evidence despite several last and final opportunities. 2. Perusal of interim orders reveal that numerous opportunities for concluding evidence including last opportunities and imposition of cost were accorded to petitioner-plaintiff, however, he had failed to conclude his evidence.

3. On 04.10.2021 case was fixed for petitioners evidence. Before impugned order was passed, case was taken up on 25 occasions. On 07 occasions proceedings could not take place as Lawyer’s had abstained work. On 04 occasions, Court was not held. As many as on 10 occasion despite effective opportunity, no witness was present from 04.10.2021 to

09.10.2025. Despite passing of 4 years only one witness was examined.

4. Las