TARSEM SINGH Vs. JITENDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner herein is the plaintiff in a Civil Suit bearing CIS No.CS/1299/2014 titled 'Tarsem Singh Vs. Jitender Singh and others', pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Ambala. He is aggrieved by the order dtd. 20/3/2023 (Annexure P9), whereby defendant No.1 has been allowed to place on record original family settlement dtd. 27/12/1999 (Ex.PZ) on an application moved under Sec. 151 CPC.

(2.) 1 As the paper-book would reveal, it was claimed by the plaintiff that vide a registered agreement to sell dtd. 27/8/2013, defendant No.1-Jitender had agreed to sell suit property for total consideration of Rs.10.00 lakh to him and had received Rs.8.00 lakh as earnest money. Only an amount of Rs.2.00 lakh remained balance, which was to be paid at the time of registration of the sale deed. Plaintiff was put in possession of the suit property and given full authority to raise construction and to obtain electricity/water connection or let out the property.

(3.) Assailing the aforesaid order, learned counsel contends that in the written statement filed by the defendants, there is no reference of any such written family settlement and rather, there is a reference of only an oral family settlement. Learned counsel further contends that parties have already concluded their evidence and even the part arguments have been heard and therefore, there was absolutely no occasion for permitting the defendants to place on record the alleged family settlement (Annexure P5). Learned counsel also contends that Order XVIII Rule 17A CPC, which permitted any of the party to produce additional evidence at any stage, with the permission of the Court has since been deleted in 1999 and now, there is no such provision so as to produce any additional evidence after conclusion of the evidence by the parties. Prayer is accordingly made for setting aside the impugned order.