GURBALJIT SINGH Vs. GURWARPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN application under Order 18 Rule 1 and 3 read with Order 13 Rule 1 and 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, was filed by the petitioner No. 1, herein, before the trial Court to the effect that the respondents, herein, had adduced evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW 1/A on 19.11.2012 and, thereafter, he was dully cross -examined. On 10.07.2013, following additional issue bearing No. 7 -A was framed:

(2.) AFTER hearing both the sides, the trial Court vide impugned order dated 31.10.2013 (Annexure P -1) dismissed the application. Aggrieved, there against, the petitioner, who is defendant No. 1 before the trial Court has come up in this revision with prayer for acceptance, thereof.

(3.) THOUGHTFUL , consideration has been given to the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Onus of issue No. 7 -A is upon the petitioner and respondents Nos. 4 to 10. When they have led evidence on issue No. 7 -A, then, respondents Nos. 1 to 3 had a right to lead evidence on this issue in rebuttal. So, it is for the trial Court to see, as to whether the evidence, which is being led by the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 now in rebuttal is beyond the scope of right of leading rebuttal evidence by them. The necessary objection can be raised by the petitioner and respondents Nos. 4 to 10 to the evidence that is to be led by the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 in rebuttal. So, it cannot be held by the Court that respondents Nos. 1 to 3 are not entitled to lead rebuttal evidence, especially, when the onus of issue No. 7 -A is on the petitioner and respondents Nos. 4 to 10 and they have led evidence, thereon. Besides, this issue was framed by the trial Court when evidence had already been closed by the respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3.