ANISUDDIN Vs. VIMLA SETHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of the application filed by the plaintiffs under Order XVIII Rule 17-A read with Order 13 Rule 2 of The Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) The plaintiffs filed the above-mentioned suit seeking for a decree in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants declaring that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners and in possession of the suit property and also for a decree for specific performance of the agreements to sell dated 23.4.1981/5.5.1981 directing the defendant No.1 to execute the sale deed of the suit property in favour of the plaintiffs. The suit was filed on 22.1.1992 and the issuer in the suit were framed on 7.1.1994. During the course of trial, evidence of the parties have been recorded and on closure of the same, the matter was directed to be listed before the court for appropriate orders. On 4.9.2001, when the matter was placed before the court, pursuant to the earlier orders, it was contended by the counsel appearing for the plaintiffs that he would be filing an appropriate application seeking permission to prove the letter pertaining to delivery of possession. Pursuant to the said statement, the aforesaid application was filed in this court praying for taking on record the possession letter dt.20.4.1982. It is stated in the application that the said possession letter is dated 20.4.1982 and that the said document came to the knowledge and custody of the plaintiffs only on 2.3.2000.

(3.) The contesting defendant No. 1 closed her evidence on 9.5.96, while the plaintiffs closed their evidence on 17.1.2000. An application was filed in this court on 2.3.2000, which was registered as I.A.No. 2293/2000 wherein it was stated by the plaintiffs that the original letters dt. 31.8.84, 30.3.87 and 29.3.90 written by Riazuddin, reference whereof was made out in the plaint, were traced out only on 2.3.2000 and, therefore, the contents of the said letters could not be put to Sh. Aneesudin, PW 2 and Sh. Riazuddin, PW-3 while examining them as witnesses and, therefore, in the said application it was prayed that the said original letters may be allowed to be taken on record and Sh.Aneesudin, PW-2, Sh.Riazuddin, PW-3 and Sh.Khalid Riaz, plaintiff No.2 be permitted to be re-examined to prove the said letters.