4. It is seen that on that very date, immediately an Application was filed below Exhibit “88” by the Plaintiff for setting aside of the said order. That Application has been rejected on 02.11.2023 i.e. after two months, leading to the filing of the present Writ Petition. Though the Petitioner i.e. Plaintiff has been held for dereliction on a previous occasion also in respect of order passed under Exhibit “84” for neglecting to deposit the costs of Rs.500/-, that should not and cannot be held against the Petitioner / Plaintiff as his right to complete crossexamination of the witness of Defendant No.5 is an extremely valuable right and if denied, the case of Plaintiff will be severely prejudice and more specifically when it is concerned with ongoing witness action. Plaintiff will be non-suited if the impugned order is upheld. Justice will not be served. It is agreed that there is delay on the part of the Plaintiff. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 02.11.2023 is harsh and therefore not sustainable and quashed and set aside. Resultantly allowing the Application filed below Exhibit “88” by the Plaintiff and setting aside of the order dated 14.09.2023 is with subject to payment of costs of Rs.3,500/- to the Defendant No.5. Payment of costs shall be a condition precedent and only after the said costs are paid, the learned Trial Court is directed to permit continuation with the pending cross-examination of Defendant No.5’s witness and complete the witness action strictly in accordance with law.
