PRADEEP Vs. CHOTE SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/plaintiff has challenged the order dated 7.7.2011 whereby his application under Order 18 Rule 3 C.P.C. (Annexure P-5) is rejected by the Court below.

(2.) Earlier plaintiff filed an application which was decided by the Court below on 7.5.2009 whereby defendants were directed to produce their evidence at the beginning of the suit. Feeling aggrieved by the said order dated 7.5.2009, the defendants filed W.P.No.2578/09 before this Court which was decided on 15.2.2011. This Court opined that under Order 18 Rule 1 C.P.C., it is for the plaintiff to begin and lead evidence first and defendants cannot be compelled to lead evidence in the beginning. In obedience of this order, Shri Mahesh Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the plaintiff/petitioner has already led evidence. Thereafter, the application under Order 18 Rule 3 C.P.C. was filed wherein it is prayed that in view of issue No.2 and other issues, the burden to lead evidence is on the defendants and, therefore, after leading evidence of defendants, the petitioner/plaintiff be permitted to lead evidence in rebuttal.

(3.) The Court below rejected the said application by mainly relying on the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.2578/09. Shri Mahesh Goyal criticized this order on the ground that the Court below has erroneously applied the said order of this Court because it was passed in a different situation where the Court below had directed the defendants to lead evidence first but now the plaintiff has already led his evidence and praying for an opportunity to lead evidence in rebuttal after the defence evidence is over.