' SH. HAKIM ALI, J.---Muhammad Akhtar respondent, had filed a suit for recovery of Rs,75,000 on the basis of pro note and receipt dated 25-6-2004 under Order XXXVII of the C.P.C. Before the learned District Judge, Multan against Allah Ditta, the present petitioner. The leave was granted. Written statement was submitted by the defendant and issues were framed. Plaintiff had produced his evidence while defendant/petitioner had failed to produce his evidence, therefore, the right of production of evidence of the defendant was closed on 7-2-2007. Aggrieved from that order, the present civil revision has been filed.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of plaintiff/respondent, Muhammad Akhtar submits that respondent has got no objection, if the impugned order dated 7-2-2007 is set aside and the defendant/ petitioner is granted one last and final opportunity to produce his evidence for a date to be fixed by the learned trial Court. So, in these circumstances, the civil revision is accepted. The impugned order dated 7-2-2007 is set aside with direction to the learned trial Court to grant one final and last opportunity to petitioner/defendant to produce his evidence by fixing a specific date.
If the petitioner failed to produce his evidence on that date, the impugned order shall resurrect.
Both the parties shall appear before the learned trial Court on 29-10-2007. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.