MADAN LAL Vs. SMT. SANTOSH KUMARI KAPOOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Learned counsel for the parties Shri Brijesh Shukla and Shri Ashotosh for the opposite party.

(2.) This matter came up for admission on 13.7.2015, when a detailed order was passed by the Court, relevant portion whereof, is extracted below:

(3.) Sri Shukla submitted that the opposite party/plaintiff has not disclosed the facts in the plaint, therefore there was no occasion to file those documents which are mentioned in list 40/c. In his submissions, for the first time, he had disclosed the fact of demolition and reconstruction and handing over the building to the defendant in the year 1987, therefore there was no occasion to file those documents at the time of filing of written statement. The court below has rejected the application of the revisionist on the ground that these documents cannot be filed after the cross examination of the plaintiff-witnesses. The court has also observed that those documents were in possession of the defendants but were not filed at the time of filing of written statement and the reason for not filing the same earlier has not been disclosed.