Md. Ashfaque Alam v. Sri Vipin Bihari Jaipuriyarand ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15211 of 2014 =========================================================== Md. Ashfaque Alam S/o Seikh Allaudin, R/o Village- Adampur, P.S.- K. Nagar, P.O.- Parora, District- Purnea .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. Sri Vipin Bihari Jaipuriyar S/o Sri Vindhyavasini Prasad, R/o Mohalla- Amla Tola, P.S.- K. hat, P.O.- District- Purnia

2. Md. Munowar Ali, S/o Md. Noor Alam, R/o Village- Adampur, Mugal Toli, P.S.- K. Nagar, P.O.- Parora, District- Purnea .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Saxena For the Respondent/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 25-10-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. By the impugned order the learned court below has turned down the prayer on behalf of the petitioner for recall of the order dated 22.11.2013 by which the evidence of the defendant has been closed.

From the perusal of the materials on record as well as the impugned order, it is evident that the eviction suit has been filed against the defendant in the year 1997. It further transpires that earlier the evidence of the defendant was closed by order dated 22.02.2013 but the said order was recalled later on with direction to conclude their evidence within three days. As the said direction was not complied, again the evidence of the defendant was closed and

Patna High Court CWJC No.15211 of 2014 dt.25-10-2016 again a petition for recall was filed by the defendant and allowed with direction to the defendant to conclude the evidence within four days. The defendant failed to comply the direction and did not produce any evidence within four days as directed and thereafter the order dated 22.11.2013 was passed closing the evidence of the defendant. The defendant-petitioner thereafter filed the petition that as his father-inlaw died therefore he could not lead the evidence. The learned court below after considering the facts and circumstances of the case has rejected the prayer on behalf of the defendant as made. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a last opportunity should be granted to the petitioner to lead evidence.

In the background of the facts disclosing the conduct of the defendant in a suit for eviction which has been filed in the year 1997, this Court is not inclined to interdict the impugned order. It is well settled that a litigant is not to pursue the litigation at his leisure or pleasure. The fact remains that the father-in-law of the defendant as alleged is dead but that death must have taken place on one date and there is no explanation by the defendant as to why he did not lead evidence on any previous dates.

Accordingly, this application has no merit and is dismissed.

Patna High Court CWJC No.15211 of 2014 dt.25-10-2016 The learned court below is directed to proceed with the suit and dispose it of expeditiously in accordance with law. (V. Nath, J) Nitesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 15.12.2016 Transmission Date