JAI BHAGWAN AND OTHERS Vs. BAHADUR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSTANT revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 05.04.2012 (Annexure P/6) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karnal whereby application moved by the petitioner for framing of additional issues, has been dismissed. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners -plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction. After notice, the respondent -defendants appeared and filed their written statement. Thereafter, replication to the written statement has been filed. During the course of proceedings, an application has been filed by the petitioners for framing of additional issues stating therein that the petitioners have clearly pleaded in their replication that the respondents have illegally and unlawfully encroached upon the suit property and raised construction and also pleaded in the replication for restoration of their possession and the petitioners have also adduced evidence in this regard, but inadvertently the issue regarding the restoration of possession could not be framed which is essential for deciding the controversy involved in the present suit. The learned trial Court vide order dated 05.04.2012 (Annexure P/6) dismissed the application on the ground that the pleadings consists of only plaint and written statement as per Order 6 Rule 1 CPC and the issues are framed on the basis of the pleadings and not on the basis of replication. Hence, this revision petition.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

(3.) THE Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Laxmanan's case (supra) has held as under: -