NAZIR KHAN Vs. CHANCHAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COUNSEL for the petitioner states that respondent No.2 is not necessary for adjudication of this petition and her name may be struck off from the array of respondents. It is so done.

(2.) COUNSEL for the defendant, petitioner herein, is aggrieved of order dated 1.5.2014 (Annexure P -15) passed by the lower court, whereby the respondent -plaintiff has been allowed to lead secondary evidence pertaining to agreement to sell dated 28.11.2002 even though the matter is pending adjudication before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

(3.) THE suit pending adjudication before the court below pertains to specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 28.11.2002. The respondent -plaintiff had moved an application for producing secondary evidence to prove the said agreement. The Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Malerkotla had allowed application of the respondent -plaintiff vide order dated 11.2.2012 (Annexure P -11). This order was challenged before this Court by the defendant. Accepting his plea, the order dated 11.2.2012 of the lower court was set aside and application of the respondentplaintiff for leading secondary evidence subsequently was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 8.2.2013 (Annexure P -12). Against order dated 8.2.2013 of this Court, the respondent -plaintiff had moved the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India where the matter is still pending. While staying pronouncement of final judgment, proceedings in the suit were ordered to continue by the Hon'ble Apex Court. It was vide order dated 29.4.2013 (Annexure P -13).