RISAL SINGH Vs. LAJJE RAM AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition arises out of an order, dated June 14, 1989, passed by the Subordinate Judge First Class, Hissar, declining the permission to the plaintiff to lead additional evidence by producing the report of a Local Commissioner alleged to have been given in a suit filed by the plaintiff. The trial Court observed that the suit was filed as far back as Aug. 28, 1984 for declaration with consequential relief of injunction, that the plaintiff was owner in possession of agricultural land given in the plaint. The charter of claim was that he was in possession since the partition of the joint family property.

(2.) It was undisputed that the plaintiff made an application for appointment of a Local Commissioner which was dismissed. The plaintiff petitioner filed another suit against another different party, and the Local Commissioner was got appointed for visiting the land in dispute. The respondents were not parties to the said suit. An application for permission to produce additional evidence by producing the Local Commissioner's report in the other suit was preferred.

(3.) The learned trial Court declined the prayer for additional evidence on the ground that it would delay the suit and further the conditions imposed by Order XVIII, rule 17-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, for granting permission to produce additional evidence were not satisfied.