PREM SAGAR GUPTA Vs. KAMLESH KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this petition the impugned order dated 7th October, 2003, passed by the learned ASJ, whereby the application of the petitioner/plaintiff to produce the evidence in rebuttal was declined has been challenged. So far as the right of the plaintiff to lead the evidence in rebuttal after the closure of the evidence of defendants' on the issues onus of which was on the defendant is concerned this right is vested in the plaintiff by virtue of Order 18 Rule 3 CPC, which reads as under:-

(2.) The perusal of the impugned order shows that the application of the petitioner for exercising this right was dismissed mainly on the ground that the application has been moved after two months of the closure of the evidence by the defendant. According to the learned ADJ the plaintiff was required to move such an application on that very day when the evidence was closed by the defendant. I am afraid such a view is highly untenable and difficult to accept as for belated application the plaintiff could have been burdened with the cost as it is for such eventuality that cost is deemed as panacea. Rejection of a right of a person to produce evidence in rebuttal on account of delayed application is negation of the right itself. To deny this right on its belated exercise is not only infraction of a legal right but also amounts to defeating the interests of justice.

(3.) It appears that the zealousness of the learned ADJ to dispose of the matter expeditiously has resulted in counter production inasmuch as that the disposal of the case has been delayed for about 8 months or so because of the pendency of this petition challenging the impugned .