HARINDER KAUR Vs. NIRMAL KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HARINDER Kaur, who is respondent no. 4 before the lower appellate court and was defendant no. 4 in the trial court, has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning order dated 31.1.2013 Annexure P/4 passed by the lower appellate court thereby partly allowing application Annexure P/2 filed by respondent no. 1- plaintiff Nirmal Kaur (appellant before the lower appellate court) for additional evidence.

(2.) SUIT filed by respondent no. 1-plaintiff against petitioner and proforma respondents no. 2 to 7 for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 9.8.2002 was dismissed by the trial court vide judgment and decree dated 11.8.2009 Ex. P/1 inter alia on the ground that the impugned agreement Ex. P/1 was not proved and documents Exs. P8 to P13, regarding willingness of certain persons to advance loan to Kamal Kant Singh for purchase of suit property, were also not proved and therefore, readiness and willingness of the plaintiff to perform her part of the agreement was not proved.

(3.) DEFENDANTS by filing reply Annexure P/3 contested the application and controverted the averments made therein and inter alia pleaded that there is no ground for permitting the plaintiff to lead additional evidence at the stage of first appeal and the plaintiff could not be permitted to fill up lacuna in her case.