DINESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision petition against the order dated 24-1-2002 passed by the trial Court dismissing the application of the plaintiff for permission to produce evidence in rebuttal, in order to rebut the evidence led by the defendants.

(2.) The plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he was not liable to pay the arrears of market fees and as such the notice of demand of the said arrears was against law and facts and was liable to be set aside. By way of consequential relief, decree of permanent injunction was sought, restraining the defendants from recovering said arrears from the plaintiff. The said suit was contested by the defendants. Learned trial Court framed various issues. The plaintiff led his evidence. Thereafter, defendants led their evidence. Thereafter, plaintiff filed an application for permission to adduce evidence in rebuttal, on the allegations that during evidence led by the defendants, a copy of voters list had been produced which created ambiguity regarding the age of the plaintiff and, therefore, it had become necessary to rebut this assertion of the defendants and to contradict the age of the plaintiff, it was requested that the father of the plaintiff be allowed to be examined in rebuttal to depose about the correctness and veracity of statement of DW 2, with regard to the age of plaintiff, Said application of the plaintiff was contested by the defendants. It was alleged that since plaintiff had already closed his evidence in affirmative, he was not permitted under law to produce evidence in rebuttal to the evidence led by the defendants. Learned trial Court, after hearing both sides and after perusing the record, dismissed the said application of the plaintiff vide order dated 24-1-2002, Aggrieved against the same, the plaintiff has filed the present revision petition.

(3.) Notice of motion was issued.