PREM CHAND GUPTA Vs. SUKHLEEN SINGH DHILLON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dtd. 16/10/2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali) whereby the application (Annexure P-2) filed by the plaintiff- respondent No.1 herein for summoning two witnesses after closing of the evidence of the defendant No.1-appellant herein was allowed.

(2.) Brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the plaintiff- respondent No.1 herein filed a suit for declaration that the cancellation of agreement to sell dtd. 27/12/2019 was illegal, null and void and unilateral and does not affect the rights of the plaintiff-respondent No.1 herein as also for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell dtd. 27/12/2019. Vide order dtd. 20/12/2022, after completion of the pleadings, the following issues were framed :

(3.) After the defendant No.1-petitioner herein had closed his evidence, an application (Annexure P-2) was filed by the plaintiff-respondent No.1 for summoning two witnesses. The application simply stated that in order to clarify the events, it was necessary to examine Sohel Bhasin and the Clerk concerned from Indian Bank. Reply was filed to the said application. Vide the impugned order dtd. 16/10/2024 the said application was allowed on the ground that the testimony of the said witnesses was likely to aid in the determination of real controversy between the parties and that the delay caused could be compensated by way of costs. It was further held that the defendants would have the right to cross-examine the said witnesses. Aggrieved by the order dtd. 16/10/2024 the present revision petition has been filed by defendant No.1-petitioner herein.