JAI SINGH Vs. MAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application has been filed by the respondents/defendants praying inter alia for permission to produce additional documentary evidence.

(2.) Learned counsel for the respondents/defendants states that his clients had filed photocopies of twenty five documents under an index dated 22.05.2002, which was subsequent to their filing the written statement in the trial court. The said list of documents includes copies of the lease deeds dated 11.08.1953 and 11.02.1954 executed by the Delhi Improvement Trust in respect of the subject premises No.11805-11806, Gali No.6, Sat Nagar, Karol Bagh, in favour of the respondents No.1 and

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents/defendants No.1 & 2 states that the aforesaid documents are very material for deciding the suit instituted by the appellants/plaintiffs praying inter alia for a decree of partition of the subject plots. However, the counsel who was conducting the case on behalf of the respondents/defendants in the trial court had committed a blunder by failing to place on record the original documents or producing the same at the time of admission and denial of documents, so that they could have been exhibited. As a result, the trial court did not have an opportunity to examine the aforesaid documents, the defendants having failed to exhibit them. He states that his clients ought not to be made to suffer for the folly of their counsel and interest of justice demands that the said documents be permitted to be produced by way of additional evidence and be taken into consideration.