JUDGMENT 1. - The plaintiff-petitioners no. 1 & 2 are only necessary parties to this revision petition. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. Under the impugned order, the learned trial Court has declined to grant the prayer of the defendant-petitioner to recall the order under which his evidence was closed. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioners No. 1 & 2 submits that he has no objection in case last opportunity is granted to the defendant-petitioner to produce his evidence. But as he made deliberately attempt to delay the trial of suit which is of the year 1995, heavy costs may be imposed. 4. From the impugned order of the learned trial Court, I find that more than sufficient opportunity is given to the defendant-petitioner to produce his evidence. Prima facie, it appears to be a case where attempt has been made by him to delay the trial of the suit. I find sufficient justification in this prayer made by the learned counsel for the plaintiff-non-petitioner that heavy costs may be imposed if this opportunity is granted to the petitioner. Another prayer made that trial Court be directed to decide the suit at an early date. It deserves acceptance. This revision petition stands disposed of, on the concession made by the learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner Nos. 1 & 2, in terms that last opportunity is granted to the defendant-petitioner to produce his evidence on the condition to pay of Rs. 5,000/- as costs. The defendant-petitioner shall have a right to produce the evidence only on payment of Rs. 5,000/- to the plaintiff- petitioner No. 1. This amount of the costs is to be paid personally to the plaintiff-petitioner No. 1 by an Account Payee Cheque/DD/Pay Order. Learned Trial Court is directed to decide the suit within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the coy of this order.Revision petition disposed of. *******