J. M. MALIK, J. ( 1 ) THE respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance, and in the alternative for recovery of Rs. 4,60,000/- with interest before the trial court. The case was fixed for petitioner's/defendant No. 1's evidence on 6th august, 2007, on which date the petitioner's counsel requested for adjournment on the ground that the petitioner had filed a transfer application before the learned District Judge. However, the trial court closed the evidence of defendant No. 1 vide impugned order. The relevant para of the impugned order is reproduced as under :- "at this stage, counsel for defendant no. 1 was called upon to disclose next date of hearing of transfer application before the ld. District Judge so that counsel for plaintiff could appear and the time for issuance of notice on the transfer application could be saved. But counsel for defendant no. 1 states that he does not remember the date fixed before the ld. District Judge as he is not carrying his diary. He states that transfer application was filed on 03/08/07. As rightly pointed out by ld. counsel for plaintiff, had the application been filed on 03/08/07, the application would have been listed for hearing today, which is not the case. It is stated that there is no transfer application moved by defendant no. 1. In the over all circumstances, I do not find stand taken by defendant no. 1 or her counsel in the court as truthful, much less bona fide. Adjournment request of defendant no. 1 is declined. Defendant no. 1 is again called upon to step into the box. Defendant no. 1 refuses to step into the box. Under the circumstances, evidence of defendant no. 1 is closed. " ( 2 ) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Counsel for the petitioner admitted that the petitioner had committed a mistake before the trial court. He vehemently argued that some costs should be imposed on the petitioner and she should be permitted to appear in the witness box. He also submitted that the petitioner was under the impression that till the transfer application was decided, she was not supposed to lead her evidence. Consequently, she did not obey the orders of the Court. It was also pointed out that the transfer application is yet to be decided. Its copy has also been placed on record. He also submitted that the petitioner was under the impression that till the transfer application was decided, she was not supposed to lead her evidence. Consequently, she did not obey the orders of the Court. It was also pointed out that the transfer application is yet to be decided. Its copy has also been placed on record. He admitted that the proceedings before the trial court were not stayed by the district Judge and as such, the orders passed by the trial court cannot be faulted. He further pointed out that the petitioner is an illiterate poor lady and in the interests of justice, one more opportunity should be granted in her favour. ( 3 ) ON the other hand, counsel for the respondent submitted that if one more opportunity is granted to the petitioner, then it will set up a wrong precedent. He opined that the orders of the Court should have been obeyed under all circumstances. He further prayed that in case this petition is allowed, then the opportunity to appear in witness box be given to the petitioner before 23rd October, 2007, the next date fixed before the trial court. ( 4 ) IT is apparent that the bizarre conduct of the petitioner before the trial court is difficult to fathom. The counsel for the respondent may be right in a measure. He may snigger at this point but the appellate court cannot ignore the fact that the paramount duty of the court is to dispense with justice. Justice is not to be taken by storm. She is to be wooed by slow advances. Keeping in view the rival contentions of both the parties and in the interests of justice, I permit the petitioner to lead evidence subject to petitioner's paying costs of Rs. 7000/- with the Delhi High Court Mediation and conciliation Centre, UCO Bank Account No. 48852 within ten days. Parties are directed to appear before the trial court on 19th October, 2007, when the trial court will permit the petitioner to lead her evidence after verifying that the above-said costs stand deposited. The order of the court be adhered to strictly. No other opportunity be granted to the petitioner. ( 5 ) THE petition and application are disposed of. A copy of this order be sent to the trial court forthwith through a special messenger. The order of the court be adhered to strictly. No other opportunity be granted to the petitioner. ( 5 ) THE petition and application are disposed of. A copy of this order be sent to the trial court forthwith through a special messenger. Copies of this order be also given dasti to both the counsel for the parties.