JUDGMENT Permod Kohli. J. (Oral):-This Revision is directed against the order dated 8.5.2007 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Muktsar whereby an application filed by the present petitioner who is plaintiff before the trial court, for additional evidence by summoning one Varinder Pal as a witness has been rejected. The only reason given by the petitioner in the application was that earlier this witness was summoned with a wrong name and, therefore, service could not be effected. Now he has come to know about the real name of the witness. Admittedly, when the witness did not accept the summon, no effort was made to file correct name of the witness in the trial court. It is only after the evidence was closed, that the application came to be made. The trial court has dealt with the application and found that no indulgence is required to be shown as the evidence was closed even after granting last opportunity. I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. However, in the interest of justice, the petitioner is allowed one opportunity to produce the said witness, namely, Varinder Pal on his own responsibility before the trial court, on the date fixed by the trial court. If the petitioner fails to produce the said witness, the impugned order shall remain operative. Copy of this order be given dasti on payment of usual charges. ——————————