MALKHAN Vs. DEEN DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff Din Dayal filed a suit for permanent injunction against the defendants Malkhan and Raj Karan. The aforesaid suit was filed on October 5, 1995. It was claimed by the plaintiff that he was owner in possession of the suit land.

(2.) When the proceedings in the suit were at the advanced stage and the case was fixed for rebuttal evidence and arguments, the defendants-petitioners filed an application for producing additional evidence. By way of additional evidence, an order dated November 10, 2000 passed by the competent authority under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 and a mutation dated December 29, 2000, were sought to be produced. The aforesaid prayer of the defendants was declined by the learned trial Court vide order dated March 6, 2002. The aforesaid order has been impugned by the defendants before this Court.

(3.) At the outset, Shri Praveen Hans, the learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the present petition may be treated to be a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Shri Ashok Verma, the learned Counsel for the respondent, has no objection to the aforesaid request, being allowed. Accordingly, the present petition is treated to be a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.