← Library
Patna High CourtC.Misc./429/2020disposed

Jayant Kumar Singh v. Priya Devi @ Tunni Devi

2021-11-16Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.429 of 2020 ====================================================== Jayant Kumar Singh S/o Ramanand Singh, resident of village- Sanhouli, P.S.- Chitragupta Nagar, District- Khagaria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

Priya Devi @ Tunni Devi D/o Mostt. Saroj Devi, resident of Jahangirpur Naya Tola, Biddupur, Mojipur, District- Vaishali (Bihar) presently residing at C/o Ajeet Singh, Saran Clinic, Adarsh Colony, Surajjpur, Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar (Uttar Pradesh).

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Praveen Kumar Agrawal Mr. Santosh Kr. Singh For the Respondent/s :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 16-11-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

It appears that the petitioner has filed the petition dated 14.11.2019 before the court below to re-open his evidence, which was closed, vide order dated 10.05.2019. The learned court below has rejected the petition by a detailed order mentioning that the issues were settled on 16th May 2017 and three opportunities were provided to the petitioner for adducing his evidence. Thereafter, after giving of last opportunity the evidence was closed on 10th May 2019.

The impugned order itself shows that the proper opportunities have been provided to the petitioner for adducing his evidence, but considering the submissions of the learned

Patna High Court C.Misc. No.429 of 2020(2) dt.16-11-2021 2/2 counsel, one more opportunity is being provided to the petitioner for producing his entire evidence. The learned Trial Court shall not give more than one date opportunity to the petitioner for his evidence. The petitioner is directed to make a payment of Rs.5,000/- to the respondent as cost for indemnifying the delay caused to the act of the petitioner. With the above observation, this miscellaneous application is being disposed of.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey , J) Mahesh/- U