NEELAM RANI Vs. ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Neelam Rani petitioner has filed this civil revision petition against respondents Ashok Kumar etc. under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the impugned order dated 1.8.2014 (Annexure-P. 1) passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana, whereby the application moved by the petitioner under Section 151 C.P.C. for permission to produce additional evidence has been dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.

(2.) At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that he only wants to produce the report of Hand-writing and Fingerprints Expert and the copy of the judgment passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana in a complaint case.

(3.) At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner failed to show as to how the judgment passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class in a criminal complaint case is binding or relevant in the present controversy. Similarly, the counsel for the petitioner admitted that the report of Hand-writing and Finger-prints Expert, which he wants to place on record, is not per se admissible document without summoning Hand-writing and Finger-prints Expert and without his cross-examination, this report of Hand-writing and Finger-prints Expert cannot be proved. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he wants to produce the report as marked document only is no ground to allow additional evidence. When the production of the report of the Handwriting and Finger prints Expert is not per se admissible and the petitioner is not asking for examination of the Hand-writing and Fingerprints Expert Dr. Inderjit Singh, then in these circumstances, the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana is justified in refusing this additional evidence. Similarly, when it is not shown that under which provision of the Indian Evidence Act, the judgment of criminal Court is relevant in the present controversy, therefore, the order of dismissing the application passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana is correct and as per law. No illegality has been committed by the learned lower Court while passing this order. Therefore, finding no merit in this civil revision petition, the same is dismissed.