R.N Mittal, J. (Oral) — This revision petition has been filed by the Page: 349plaintiff against the order of Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Jalandhar, disallowing the petitioner to lead additional evidence.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner wants to produce cheques and invoices, the photostat copies of which were placed on the record along with the plaint. As there were over 100 documents on the record, therefore, through oversight the documents could not be got exhibited by the counsel.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. In the circumstances of the case, I feel that the cheques and the invoices could not be got exhibited through oversight. The cheques it is alleged were issued by the defendants. It has been held by this Court in Om Parkash v. Sarupa and others, AIR 1981 Punjab and Haryana 157, that a party cannot be allowed to suffer for any omission or lapse on the part of his counsel, and the rules of procedure are meant to advance the cause of justice. I am in respectful agreement with the above observation. Consequently, I accept the revision petition and allow the petitioner to prove the cheques and the invoices the photostat copies of which are already on record. This shall be subject to payment of Rs. 500/- as costs. Defendant-respondents shall be given an opportunity to rebut the evidence. No order as to costs.
4. The parties are directed to appear in the trial Court on 13.1.1988 The Court on that date shall fix a date for evidence of the petitioner, which is convenient to it.
Petition accepted.