Item- 5. sg 27-08-2026 Ct. 6 CO 1381 of 2025 CAN 1 of 2026 Mumta Khaparde @ Mamata Khaparde Versus Prakash Simon Mr. Amarnath Sukul …for the petitioner Mr. Arijit Dey …for the opposite party Though the matter is appearing under the heading ‘Extension of Interim Order’, but with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, this civil revisional application is taken up for final hearing by treating the same as on the day’s list. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the wife and is directed against an order being No. 55 dated 19th March, 2025 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Paschim Medinipur in Matrimonial Suit No. 807 of 2016. By the order impugned, the evidence of the defendant’s witness stood closed. The learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that since the relevant papers could not be collected, a prayer for adjournment was made but the learned trial judge, without appreciating such fact, closed the evidence of the defendant’s witness. The learned advocate appearing for the plaintiff/opposite party herein, disputes such contention of the learned advocate for the petitioner. He submits that the evidence of the plaintiff/opposite party was concluded sometime in the year 2023 and thereafter, the hearing of the suit for the evidence of the wife petitioner was adjourned on 2 several occasions, at least for five times upon imposition of costs. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the materials placed. Though the explanation given in the application praying for time may not be fully acceptable to this Court but considering the fact that the suit is a matrimonial suit and the evidence of the wife/defendant stood closed, this Court is inclined to grant a last opportunity to the wife/petitioner to adduce the evidence. At this stage, the learned advocate appearing for the opposite party submits that tomorrow (28th August, 2026) is the date fixed before the learned trial judge for argument. The impugned order is set aside subject to the following conditions: a) The wife/petitioner shall remain present before the learned trial judge on 28th August, 2026 for adducing evidence and in that event, the learned trial judge shall allow the defendant to adduce evidence and conclude the evidence of the defendant’s witness as early as possible but preferably within a period of eight working weeks from tomorrow; b) If the wife/petitioner is not inclined to adduce any evidence tomorrow or prays for an adjournment, the liberty granted to the petitioner by this order, shall automatically stand recalled and the civil revisional application shall stand dismissed without any further reference to this Court; 3 c) The learned trial judge shall make an endeavour to dispose of the Matrimonial Suit No. 807 of 2016 as expeditiously as possible but preferably within a period of four working months from the next date fixed; Though this is a fit case for imposition of cost, but considering the fact as stated hereinbefore, this Court refrains from imposing any cost upon the petitioner. With the above observation and directions, C.O. No. 1381 of 2025 along with CAN 1 of 2026 stands disposed of. Affidavit of service filed in Court is taken on record. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisites formalities. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)