PARDUMAN SINGH Vs. Y D SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner by this revision petition has assailed an order dt. 15-9-1997, by which the Civil Judge dismissed the petitioner's application under Order XIV, Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code as well as the application under Order XVIII, Rule 17A of the Code of Civil Procedure, for being given yet another opportunity to lead additional evidence.

(2.) Mr. Raivnder Sethi, Sr. Advocate, along with Mr. V.P. Sharma, Advocate, have appeared for the respondent/caveator. Counsel for both the parties have filed their list of dates and synopsis and with the consent of the parties the hearing of the revision petition was taken up.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner urged that the Trial Court had erred in framing issue No. 3, viz. "Whether the plaintiff is tenant in respect of the land in dispute". At the outset, it may be noticed that the Trial Court has corrected this to read, "Whether the defendant is a tenant in respect of the land in dispute?" Mr. S.K. Bagga. learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that it was his case that there were structures on the land and the tenancy comprised not only the land but the structure as well. The said plea/objection would be covered by another issue framed as under: