RAMESH CHAND Vs. BISHAN DASS AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, defendant no. 2 Ramesh Chand, who is also legal representative of defendant no. 16 Nirmla Devi (since deceased), has assailed order dated 03.06.2011 (Annexure P-6), passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mukerian, thereby dismissing application (Annexure P-4) moved by the petitioner for additional evidence. None is appearing for respondent no. 1-plaintiff today. None either has appeared for respondent no. 1-plaintiff on the preceding two dates of hearing in spite of service. Accordingly, I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.

(2.) By way of additional evidence, the petitioner wants to tender in evidence copy of inheritance mutation no. 913 of Nirmla Devi - defendant no. 16, sanctioned in favour of petitioner Ramesh Chand and also copy of jamabandi for the year 2006-07. The trial court disallowed the same on the ground that the said documents were very much in the knowledge of the petitioner at the time of closing of his evidence. However, application for additional evidence could not be dismissed on this ground because necessity of moving application for additional evidence arise when proposed evidence is not adduced at appropriate stage. In the instant case, copies of mutation and jamabandi only are sought to be tendered by way of additional evidence. The said documents are per se admissible in evidence and are not likely to be fabricated. Consequently, permission for producing the proposed additional evidence should be granted, on payment of cost. Impugned order of the trial court is illegal and unsustainable and suffers from jurisdictional error because the trial court refused to exercise jurisdiction which vested in it to permit the petitioner to lead proposed additional evidence. Accordingly, the instant revision petition is allowed. Impugned order (Annexure P-6) passed by the trial court is set aside. Application (Annexure P-4) moved by the petitioner for additional evidence is allowed and petitioner is permitted to produce copy of mutation no. 913 and copy of jamabandi for the year 2006-07 by way of additional evidence, subject to payment of Rs. 3,000/- as cost precedent.