BHOLESWAR MAHANTA Vs. PURNA CHANDRA MAHANTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioners {defendants in the suit vide C.S. No.127 of 2014 pending before the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Keonjhar} challenging the acceptance of the R.o.R. submitted by the plaintiff as per order dtd. 31/10/2019 and marking the same as Ext.25 on the ground that, the said document vide Ext.25 (R.o.R.) should not have been accepted and marked as Ext.25 on behalf of the plaintiff (opposite party) after closure of evidence from the both the sides at the time of hearing of the arguments.

(2.) Heard from the learned counsels of both the sides.

(3.) During the course of hearing of this CMP, learned counsel for the petitioners (defendants before the Trial Court vide C.S. No.127 of 2014) contended that, in case of acceptance of the additional document after closure of evidence from both the sides and marking of the same as Ext.25 on behalf of the plaintiff in the suit vide C.S. No.127 of 2014, it was the duty of the learned Trial Court to give opportunity to the defendants for adducing rebuttal evidence against the same. But, without doing so, learned Trial Court has simply accepted the document i.e. R.o.R. and has marked the same as Ext.25 on behalf of the plaintiff. For which, the defendants being the petitioners have challenged the same by filing this CMP under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950.