ANJANA A GULATI Vs. MEERA G PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are the original plaintiffs and the respondents are the original defendants. For the sake of convenience of the parties, they shall be referred to as plaintiffs and defendants.

(2.) THE plaintiffs have challenged an order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 15th January, 2008 in chamber Summons No. 1689 of 2007. By the said order, the learned Single Judge was pleased to allow the Chamber summons which is taken out by the defendants seeking liberty to lead evidence and to place on record all documents referred to in the affidavit of documents which was filed by the defendants. Grievance of the plaintiffs is that after they had led their evidence, the defendants had specifically informed the Court that they did not wish to lead any evidence. It is the contention of the plaintiffs that after having taken a stand not to lead evidence, it was not open for the defendants to subsequently file application seeking permission of the court to lead evidence. In order to appreciate the rival contention, it is necessary to state the brief facts of the case :

(3.) ORIGINAL plaintiffs have a suit for specific performance on 16th January, 1979. On 25th March, 1980, all the defendants had filed their written statement. In February 1995, an affidavit of documents was filed by the defendants giving a list of 59 documents which were referred to and relied on by the defendants. Sometime in July, 2003, the original defendant no. 1 died and defendant nos. 2 and 3 retired and therefore, the present defendants were substituted in their place. On 2nd august, 2003, they filed their written statement. On 16th June, 2003, an affidavit of plaintiff no. 3 was filed in lieu of examination-in-chief. Seven issues were framed by the Court on 28th August, 2003. The plaintiff no. 1 filed his affidavit of evidence in lieu of examination-in-chief on 25th September, 2003. After his evidence was over, the plaintiffs closed their case. The defendants through their Counsel made a statement that they did not wish to lead evidence.