MOHD FIROZ Vs. MOHD SHAKEEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed order dated 2nd January, 2008 of the learned Trial court whereby the Trial Court allowed an application under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC read with Order 7 Rule 14 CPC and permitted the plaintiff/respondent to place on record a sale deed in respect of the adjoining property bearing no. 404-B and exhibit and prove the same as per law.

(2.) THE Trial Court found that a portion of the suit property no. 404 had been sold by the vendor as 404-A in favour of the plaintiff and other portion was sold as 404-B in favour of Shujauddin. The plaintiff, who claimed the ownership of his portion of the property wanted to place on record the sale deed in respect of the other portion namely 404-B only to show that the original owner had executed two sale deeds in respect of the two portions of the same property numbering them 404-A and 404-B in favour of two different vendors.

(3.) THE Trial Court found that the bringing of this evidence on record was necessary to clear the controversy in respect of property number. However, since the plaintiff had approached the Court with delay, the application was allowed with costs of Rs. 3,500/ -. The order is challenged by the petitioner on the ground that the Trial Court passed this order in disregard to the provisions of producing additional evidence as the case had already matured for final arguments and Trial Court committed error in invoking inherent powers provided under Section 151 of CPC.