RAVINDER KUMAR Vs. VED PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NOTICE of motion was issued. Respondents have put in appearance. With the consent of counsel for the parties, the revision petition is being disposed of at the motion stage itself.

(2.) PLAINTIFF -petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) filed a suit against the respondents and in order to prove his case produced PW-1 Banarsi Dass who was stated to be a tenant under the defendant respondents (hereinafter referred to as the respondents). Banarsi Dass produced his receipt which had been obtained from Ved Parkash at the time of relinquishing the possession of the premises and handing over of the hand pump. This receipt was not taken on the record by the trial Court by making the following observations :-

(3.) BANARSI Dass had been produced as a witness who was a tenant under the respondents. This was not a document on which reliance was placed by the petitioner and which could have mentioned in the list of documents. The purported is receipt alleged to have been issued by the respondents and they would be given a chance to rebut the same when they step into the witness-box or by producing any other evidence. At this stage, receipt should have been taken on the record and the trial Court committed an error in not exhibiting the same.