IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 158 CR-5089-2026 Date of Decision: 27.07.2026 RAM SARUP ...Petitioner Versus KARAMBIR AND ORS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA **** Present: Mr. DPS Bajwa, Advocate for the petitioner. DEEPAK GUPTA , J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is the defendant before the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Narwana, in CIS No.CS-80-2022. The present petition assails the impugned order dated 20.02.2026 (Annexure P-2), whereby the evidence of the petitioner-defendant has been closed. The impugned order reads as under:- “Despite last opportunity, that too, with costs no DW is present. In the morning the counsel for defendants requested for some time but despite keeping the file pending till 3.20 PM, defendant side did not bring any evidence. Perusal of file shows that defendants have not filed any list of witnesses till date. Case was fixed for their evidence on 04.01.2024 and in last more than two years they have availed more than sufficient opportunities. In totality of circumstances, no ground is made out to give another date. Hence evidence of defendants is closed by Court order. Now to come upon 15.05.2026 for depositing costs by defendants as well as for rebuttal evidence and arguments. (Sandeep Kumar), ACJ(SD)/SDJM Narwana, UID No. HR0421 20.02.2026’ 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was suffering from a chronic disease and therefore, was not in a position to lead his evidence. He prays that one effective opportunity be granted to the petitioner to conclude his evidence. NISHA 2026.07.31 10.02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-5089-2026 -2- 3. The language of the impugned order itself reveals that despite numerous opportunities having been granted to the petitioner-defendant, he failed to avail the same. Those opportunities were granted over a period of more than two years. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, this Court does not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order warranting interference. 4. However, in the interest of justice and in order to afford one final opportunity to the defendant-petitioner to lead his evidence, the present petition is allowed to the extent that one effective opportunity is granted to the petitioner-defendant to conclude his evidence, subject to payment of costs of Rs.25,000/- to the respondent-plaintiff by way of a demand draft. 5. It is informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that the next date before the learned trial Court is 07.08.2026. The petitioner shall pay the costs, as imposed by this Court, on the said date and only thereafter shall the learned trial Court fix a date for recording the evidence of the defendant- petitioner. It is made clear that only one effective opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner, who shall produce his entire evidence at his own responsibility on that date. 6. Disposed of. 7. Since the order has been passed without issuing notice to the respondents in order to avoid unnecessary delay, they shall be at liberty to seek appropriate remedy in accordance with law. (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE July 27, 2026 Nisha-1 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No NISHA 2026.07.31 10.02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document