IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.145 of 2025 Decided on: 19.06.2025 Parbati Kol Dam Transmission Company Ltd. ….Petitioner Versus Shiri Ram Syal Hydropower Pvt.Ltd. & another ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Atul Jhingan, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Varun Chauhan, Advocate. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral) By way of instant petition, the petitioner has assailed order dated 22.03.2025, passed by learned Civil Judge, Banjar, District Kullu in Civil Suit No.207/19/16, whereby the evidence of the petitioner herein was closed by order of the Court. 2. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner could not produce its evidence on 22.03.2025 for the reason that the original Counsel, representing the petitioner, was busy in attending upon her ailing mother, who had been hospitalized in Fortis Hospital, Mohali w.e.f. 18.03.2025. 3. In order to substantiate the above contention, the petitioner has placed on record document Annexure P-4, according to which the patient named Hema Devi was admitted in 2 Fortis Hospital, Mohali on 18.03.2025 and was discharged on 23.03.2025. The said patient was stated to be resident of village Lunapani, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh. There is nothing on record to controvert the assertion made by the petitioner that the document Annexure P-4 pertains to the ailing mother of learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. The record also reveals that the petitioner had already availed sufficient opportunities for leading the evidence, which forced learned trial Court to pass the impugned order. Be that as it may, since it has been shown that the petitioner had sufficient cause for not being able to produce its evidence on 22.03.2025, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity needs to be allowed in favour of petitioner to enable it to produce its entire evidence. 5. In result, the impugned order dated 22.03.2025, passed by learned Civil Judge, Banjar, District Kullu in Civil Suit No.207/19/16 is set aside. Learned trial Court is directed to afford only one opportunity to the petitioner herein/defendant to produce its entire evidence. It is clarified that in case the petitioner fails to produce the evidence on the date fixed for the purpose, no further opportunity shall be allowed and the evidence of the petitioner shall stand closed automatically. 3 6. This Court has been informed that the matter is already fixed before learned trial Court on 23.06.2025, on which date learned trial Court will adjourn the matter and fix a date enabling the petitioner to produce the evidence. 7. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of along with pending application(s), if any. ( Satyen Vaidya ) Judge June 19, 2025 (vt)