AJLAUR SINGH Vs. JAGTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff filed a suit for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove the underground pipeline installed in his land. The suit was contested by the defendants. The parties had led evidence in support of their respective claims. When the case was fixed for rebuttal and arguments, the plaintiff filed an application under Order 18, Rule 17-A of the Code of Civil Procedure that he may be permitted to lead additional evidence and also Local Commissioner may be appointed to demarcate the land in dispute. The prayer on these terms was declined by the trial Court vide impugned order which has given rise to the present revision petition.

(2.) I have heard Mr. Satinder Khanna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.S. Saron, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.

(3.) IT is admitted case of the petitioner that he had filed two applications for additional evidence - one was filed in the contempt petition under Order 39, Rule 2-A of the code and the other was filed in the suit which was dismissed and the same is under challenge.