1 2025:CGHC:56830 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 933 of 2025 1 - Uday Sharma S/o Mr. Dani Prasad Sharma Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Dingapur Bagindbhar, I.T. Colony, Tehsil Road, Korba, District - Korba Chhattisgarh. Present Residence - Village Naktikhar, Khasra Number - 801 And 203/2, 205, Tehsil And District - Korba Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Sanjay Rohra S/o Shri Parasram Rohra, Aged About 45 Years R/o Old Basti Korba Tehsil, Next To Sindhi Bhawan, District - Korba Chhattisgarh 2 - Om Prakash Rohra, S/o Late Dayal Das Rohra, Aged About 60 Years R/o Avanti Vihar, Anand Niketan Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Ramkumar Singh, S/o Late Laxminarayan Singh, Aged About 60 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Bhadrapara Balco, Tehsil And District Korba, Chhattisgarh 4 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Anshul Tiwari, Advocate For Respondents 1 and 3 : Shri Suryapratap Yudhhvir Singh, Advocate For Respondent No.2 : None For State / Resp. No.4 : Shri Topilal Bareth, Panel Lawyer ({Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput}) Order on Board 21/11/2025 Challenge in this writ petition is to an order dated 03/09/2025 passed by the 2 2nd District and Additional Sessions Judge, Korba in Civil Suit Class A (DJ ADJ)/6/2021 by which the petitioner’s/plaintiff’s right to lead evidence was closed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though learned trial Court was pleased to grant four occasions to the petitioner to examine the witnesses and granted adjournment on payment of cost, when the matter was called on 03/09/2025, due to unavoidable circumstances the witnesses of the plaintiff could not appear. Therefore, an application under Order 17 Rule 1 of CPC was filed, which was rejected vide impugned order. He submits that the petitioner/plaintiff has filed suit of specific performance of contract in respect of the suit property and if the petitioner / plaintiff is not provided opportunity to prove his case, it would cause irreparable loss to him and it may result in dismissal of suit in the absence of any evidence. Therefore, he submits that one last opportunity may be afforded to the petitioner/plaintiff to examine the witnesses before the learned trial Court. 3. Learned counsel for respondents 1 and 3 heavily opposed the submissions made. He submits that despite grant of four occasions, the petitioner/plaintiff failed to examine any of the witnesses even after imposition of cost which was paid belatedly. He submits that the action of the petitioner/plaintiff is not bonafide. Therefore, there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 4. Learned State counsel submits that the dispute is between the petitioner/ plaintiff and respondents 1 to 3. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. From perusal of documents appended with the petition, it appears that the petitioner filed suit for specific performance of contract in respect of the suit property. It appears that the suit was filed in the year 2021 and remained pending for 3 to 4 years for different procedures. Ofcourse, learned trial had granted four occasions to the petitioner to examine the witnesses and it appears that the petitioner/plaintiff failed to do so. Though this Court does not appreciate the action of the petitioner / plaintiff of failing to examine his witnesses but in the interest of justice, this Court feels it appropriate to grant one last opportunity to the petitioner to examine all his witnesses subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- 3 to the defendants 1 to 3. 7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 03/09/2025 is hereby set aside and it is ordered that the learned trial Court will fix the case for recording of evidence of the petitioner/plaintiff from the next date of hearing and on that day, the petitioner/plaintiff shall examine all his witnesses. It is also observed that learned trial Court may not grant adjournment for examining the witnesses of the petitioner/plaintiff. With the aforesaid observation, this petition is finally disposed off. Sd/- ({Sachin Singh Rajput}) JUDGE Deepti DEEPTI HARIKUMAR Digitally signed by DEEPTI HARIKUMAR Date: 2025.11.24 13:05:58 +0530