RAJESHWAR SINGH Vs. RAMESH KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this revision petition against the order dtd. 10/10/2023 (Annexure P-5) passed in CA No.91 of 2017 titled 'Ramesh Kumari and another Vs. Rajeshwar and others' whereby learned Additional District Judge, SAS Nagar partly allowed the application moved by respondents (appellants-defendants before the learned Appellate Court) under Order 41 Rule 27 Code of Civil Procedure (for short referred to as 'CPC') for additional evidence.

(2.) Upon notice, respondent No.1 (iii) and 2 filed the reply and opposed the prayer of the petitioner, pleading non- maintainability of the petition and being devoid of merits.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner (plaintiff before the trial Court) submits that petitioner filed a suit for declaration, seeking his ownership and possessory rights in the suit property (fully detailed in the head note of the plaint), to the extent of 1/4th share on the basis of natural succession after death of his father late Sant Rajinder Singh, by declaring relinquishment deed dtd. 8/7/2009 and the subsequent mutations No.2266, 2314 and 1453, entered and sanctioned in the revenue record, on the basis of the said relinquishment deed as null and void, not binding upon the right, title and interest of the petitioner to the extent of his share in the suit property, with additional relief of grant of decree of permanent injunction against the respondents (defendants), restraining them from alienating the suit land to the extent of his share.