[2025:RJ-JP:662] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14127/2009 Mahesh Chandra Jain S/o Shri Radavallabh Jain, Plot No.933, Kisan Marg, Barkat Nagar, Tonk Fatak, Jaipur Rajasthan ----Petitioner Versus 1. Smt. Basanti Devi Jain W/o Shri Dinesh Chandra Jain, Jain Kunj, Iqbalgarh District Banas Kanta North Gujrat Gujrat Presently Through Sudarshan Lal Jain R/o 29, Bhairav Colony, Diggi Malpura Road, In Front Of Dusad Bag, Sanganer District Jaipur Rajasthan 2. Smt. Dayamanti Devi W/o Shri Mahendra Kumar Jain, Sector 22, Gautam Budh Nagar, A-197, Noida Up Presently B-100, Sector 55, Noida Up 3. Shri Suresh Chandra Jain S/o Shri Radha Ballabh Jain, 64, Iamratiya Bera, Paota, C Road, Laxminagar, Jodhpur Rajasthan 4. Additional District Judge Fast Track No.2, Jaipur City, Jaipur Rajasthan ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 06/01/2025 This civil writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) against the order dated 27.10.2009 passed by Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Jaipur City, Jaipur in civil suit No.109/2009, whereby the said Court dismissed the plaintiff’s application for reopening the plaintiff's evidence. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the plaintiff filed a suit for partition against the respondent Nos.1 to 3- defendants (for short ‘the defendants’) in which due to unavoidable reason plaintiff could not appear before the trial court [2025:RJ-JP:662] (2 of 2) [CW-14127/2009] for evidence on 22.05.2009 and his evidence was closed by the trial court. Learned counsel for the plaintiff further submits that plaintiff filed an application before the trial court for giving an opportunity to adduce the evidence of the plaintiff but trial court vide order dated 27.10.2009 dismissed the application filed by the plaintiff. Learned counsel for the plaintiff also submits that due to illness of the plaintiff, plaintiff could not appear before the trial court, so orders dated 27.10.2009 and 22.05.2009 passed by the trial court be set aside and one more opportunity be granted to the plaintiff for adducing the evidence. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the impugned order. The trial court while dismissing the application filed by the plaintiff clearly mentioned that the issues were framed by the trial court vide order dated 07.12.2007. After that ample opportunities has been given to the plaintiff for adducing the evidence but he did not appear before the trial court for adducing the evidence. The Trial court granted as many as 10 opportunities to the plaintiff for adducing the evidence. So, in my considered opinion trial court had not committed any error in closing the evidence and dismissing the application filed by the plaintiff. So, the present civil writ petition filed by the plaintiff being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, pending, stands disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J AVINASH GULERIA /50