GAY ELECTRONICS Vs. KARNAL CCC STORIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts germane to the decision of this revision succinctly are that petitioner instituted a suit for recovery of Rs.11,360.00 on account of the balance prics of "sound system for open air theatre" supplied to the defendant. Certain issues were framed on 27.1.82 but subsequently petitioner sought amendment of plaint. As a sequel thereto, two additional issues were framed by the Subordinate Judgs on 13.9.84 which were treated as preliminary in nature. The suit was adjourned to 18.10.84 for evidence of the parties. However, a few days prior to same application dated 12.10.84 was made by the petitioner purporting to be under order XII Rule 2 read with Section 151, Code of Civil Procedure (for short the 'the Code) praying that the defendant be directed to admit a couple of letters alleged to have been written by the defendant. The said application came up for hearing on 18.10.84 which, as stated above, was the. date for recording of evidence. The Sub Judge dismissed the said application with the following laconic order: "This application at this stage is not maintainable and the same is dismissed."

(2.) The grievance of the learned counsel for petitioner precisely is that even if the learned Sub-Judge was not inclined to entertain his application under order XII Rule 2 of the Code he could not have denied him the opportunity to adduce evidence by strainghtaway adjourning the suit for arguments on preliminary issues.

(3.) There is no appearance on behalf of the respondent today although counsel for the respondent was present on the last date of hearing.