ORDER : 1. Application for discharge is allowed. 2. Applications for intervention are allowed. 3. Leave granted. 4. This appeal is filed against the impugned orders of the High Court, by which the right of the appellant to lead evidence was closed in the election petition filed by the respondent. 5. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant. In view of the order passed by us in allowing the application seeking discharge filed by the counsel for the respondent, as the respondent was not appearing in person, we are inclined to proceed with the matter, especially, when the period of election itself is over. 6. On perusal of the impugned orders, we find that the High Court has adopted a hypertechnical approach in closing the right of the appellant to lead evidence due to non-appearance of the counsel. The non-appearance of the lawyer due to the strike cannot be attributed to the appellant. The appellant is an elected candidate whose case has to be heard. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned orders by permitting the appellant to lead further evidence. 8. In such view of the matter, the impugned orders stand set aside. Consequently, the order passed by the High Court closing the right of the appellant to lead evidence is also set aside. However, the appellant shall co-operate with the trial and complete his evidence within a period of four weeks. 9. The appeals are allowed, accordingly. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.