***

VIRINDER AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL) –

1. The petitioner, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenges the order dated 03.09.2025, passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rohtak, whereby the petitioner’s evidence was recorded as closed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while part cross-examination of the petitioner, Ashok Kumar, has been recorded, the cross-examination of two witnesses i.e. PW2, Anil Lambardar, and PW4, Chand Ram, remains pending, notwithstanding the fact that their examinations-in-chief have already been duly recorded by the Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner seeks a single, consolidated opportunity to tender himself and produce the aforementioned witnesses for cross-examination on the next date of hearing i.e. 19.11.2025, undertaking that all three witnesses will be present before the Court without seeking multiple adjournments.

3. Having meticulously considered the procedural history, the progress of the suit, and the averments made in the petition, this Court observes that the impugned order suffers from no illegality, perversity, or jurisdictional infirmity. The learned Civil Judge has acted well within the ambit of judicial discretion in regulating the recording of evidence.

4. In the interest of justice and in order to balance procedural propriety with the right to a fair trial, the petition is hereby disposed of with the specific direction that the petitioner shall be granted one final and definitive opportunity to tender himself and his two witnesses for cross-examination on 19.11.2025. This opportunity is strictly subject to the condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- as costs in favour of the respondents. No further adjournments shall be granted, and the petitioner shall ensure compliance with this order to prevent any prejudice to the respondents.

Order accordingly.

********