pending for adducing evidence on the part of Petitioner. After the Petitioner filed pursis for closer of his evidence on 08 February 2021, complaint was adjourned for argument. He would submit that advocate for the parties accordingly argued the complaint on 22 February 2021 and the same was adjourned only for the purpose of production of case laws. At such a belated stage, Respondents presented application dated 21 March 2021 seeking to reopen their evidence for the purpose of examining doctor who allegedly treated deceased workman. Mr. Topkar would submit that Respondents could not have permitted to file an application for reopening of their evidence at this stage where the complaint was to be finally disposed of upon production of case laws by both the parties. He would submit that the Court has committed an error in permitting Respondents to reopen their evidence after arguments from both the sides were heard. He would submit that during the course of arguments of the Petitioner an objection of non-examination of the doctor was raised. In view to nullify the said objection, application for examination of the doctor was belatedly filed at the time when the complaint was to be finally decided.
