JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the orders dated 27.10.2005 (annexure-1) and 12.01.2006 (annexure-4), whereby the evidence has been closed and further the Court has refused to review the said order by holding that the review petition is not maintainable. 3. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that on 27.10.2005 the petitioner was ill so she could not present herself for the cross-examination, although the affidavits of the other witnesses have been filed. The rejection of the review application on the ground that the medical prescription was not filed on that day i.e. 27.10.2005, is a too technical view. 4. Otherwise also, the Court has not considered the inherent powers under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908 to pass appropriate order in these types of cases. 5. No one appears to oppose the writ petition. 6. In my view, the grievance raised by the petitioner is genuine and the view taken by the trial Court is erroneous, therefore, the same deserves to be set aside. 7. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed and both the orders dated 27.10.2005 (annexure-1) and 12.01.2006 (annexure-4) are set aside. The trial Court is directed to allow the petitioner to complete her evidence within a period of one month from today.Writ Petition Allowed *******