MITHILESH Vs. SURENDRA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Suresh Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Bharat Prataap Singh, learned counsel for the contesting respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

(2.) The respondent no.2 is the plaintiff in a suit filed for cancellation of the sale deed which is in dispute. The matter proceeded and evidence was led. The petitioners who are the defendants as well as the respondents who are the plaintiffs both of them filed their respective lists of witnesses. The? plaintiffs-respondents did not name Raj Pal Singh as one of their witnesses in spite of the fact that he was an attesting witness to the sale deed, the cancellation whereof was sought.

(3.) The petitioners who were the defendants had enlisted Raj Pal Singh as one of their witnesses and his affidavit had been filed. Raj Pal Singh, however, did not turn up for cross-examination and the evidence was closed. The evidence of both sides was closed and later on an application was filed by the respondent-plaintiff to recall Raj Pal Singh for being cross-examined. This application has been allowed in the interest of justice by the Trial Court vide the impugned order dated 26.11.2005.