JUDGMENT Ajay Mohan Goel, J. - By way of this petition, filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/defendant No.2 has assailed order dated 06.04.2021, vide which the Court of learned Civil Judge, Bilaspur, H.P., has closed the evidence of defendant No.2, on the ground that said defendant had failed to lead evidence despite reasonable opportunities having been granted. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the documents appended with the petition as well as the Zimni Orders, including the impugned order. Perusal thereof demonstrates that after the evidence of the plaintiff-bank was recorded, on 09.07.2019, the case was ordered to be listed for evidence of defendant No.2 (DWs), i.e. the present petitioner, on 21.10.2019. However, on the said date, no witness (DW) was present and accordingly, on the request of defendant No.2, the case was ordered to be listed for examination of DWs on 17.12.2019, on steps being taken within seven days in this regard. 3. Record demonstrates that on 17.12.2019 also, defendant No.2 failed to lead any evidence and as a matter of indulgence, learned Court below posted the case for 26.02.2020, for evidence of defendant No.2. The story was repeated on 26.02.2020 also and the matter was ordered to be listed on 04.05.2020, for recording evidence of defendant No.2 "subject to 3rd and last opportunity". However, the matter was not listed before the Court on, 04.05.2020, due to Covid-19 Pandemic and the same was listed on 30.06.2020, on which date the following order stands recorded:- Ld. P.O. is on medical leave today and due to the spread of Pandemic disease Covid-19, none appeared for parties before the Court, as such, case is adjourned for proper order for 18.08.2020 Reader. 4. It appears that, thereafter, on 18.08.2020 also, the case could not be listed before the learned Court below as the Courts were not fully functional due to Covid-19 Pandemic. The matter was listed on 25.02.2021, on which date, learned counsel for the represented parties appeared before the Court and the case was ordered to be listed on 03.04.2021, for recording statements of defendant's witnesses (DWs). The matter was listed on 25.02.2021, on which date, learned counsel for the represented parties appeared before the Court and the case was ordered to be listed on 03.04.2021, for recording statements of defendant's witnesses (DWs). The Court did not assemble on 03.04.2021 and it was on 06.04.2021 that the Court assembled, on which date the impugned order was passed, which reads as under:- "Perusal of the files shows that case has been taken up today for effective hearing, vide separate office order. On the previous date of hearing, i.e. on 25.02.2021, it was clarified that in the interest of justice, one last opportunity, i.e. fourth opportunity was given to the defendants to lead evidence, however, neither steps have been taken, nor the evidence has been procured, as such, it deems fit to this Court to close the evidence on behalf of defendants and list the case for arguments on 29.04.2021". 5. In the considered view of the Court, as on 25.02.2021, the case was ordered to be listed for recording evidence of DWs for 03.04.2021 and the matter was not listed before the Court on the said date, i.e. 03.04.2021, then in these circumstances, learned Court below could not have had closed the evidence of the present petitioner/ defendant No.2, in the manner in which it has been done vide impugned order dated 06.04.2021. Even if, it is to be assumed that on 03.04.2021, the parties were put to notice may be by way of a General Notice that the matters listed on the said date shall be listed on 06.04.2021, then also, ipso facto, it could not have been taken for granted that defendant No.2 was to bring his witnesses for examination on the said date in the absence of a judicial order. There is no doubt that reasonable opportunities were given by the learned Court below to defendant No.2 to lead his evidence before 03.04.2021, but in the peculiar circumstances, keeping in view the fact that the date on which the case was actually ordered to be listed by the learned Court below for recording the evidence, the Court did not assemble, interest of justice demanded that fresh date by way of a judicial order ought to have been given, listing the matter for recording the statements of DWs. To put it differently, if the Court does not assembles on a particular date and on the said date, certain cases are listed for recording evidence of the parties, then if there is a General Notice that the matter listed on that particular date, shall be taken on the next date, it cannot be assumed that on the said date, the parties have to necessarily produce their witnesses. Fairness demands, when the Court assembles and the matters are listed fresh, actual date has to be fixed by the learned Judge, calling upon the parties to lead evidence. 6. In view of the findings returned hereinabove, this petition is allowed. Order dated 06.04.2021, vide which the learned Court below has closed the evidence of the defendants, is set aside, with the direction that one more opportunity shall be granted by the learned Court below to defendant No.2 to lead his evidence. It is clarified that defendant No.2 will lead his evidence on self responsibility and Court assistance shall not be allowed as earlier no steps were taken on three occasions by the present petitioner to take steps for summoning any witness. The parties through counsel are directed to appear before the learned Court below on 16.08.2021, on which date, an actual date shall be given by the learned Court below for recording the statements of witnesses of defendant No.2. It is further clarified that in case defendant No.2 does not leads his evidence on the said date, then no further opportunity for any reason whatsoever shall be granted by the learned Court below and the right of defendant No.2 to lead evidence shall stand closed. This condition, however, shall not apply in case the Court does not assembles on the date when the matter may be fixed by it for recording the statements of witnesses of defendant No.2. 7. With these observations, this petition is disposed of. No order as to closed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.