ANJU Vs. ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD . Petitioner who is respondent No. 1 in the proceedings pending before the trial court was afforded six opportunities for her evidence and she having failed to. conclude her evidence, the trial court by its order dated 8. 8. 1996 closed her evidence. A few days later, the petitioner moved an application under Order 18 Rule 17-A of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking permission to produce additional evidence. The trial court again considered this application and by detailed reasoned order dated 22. 8. 1996 dismissed the same. Aggrieved there against the petitioner has filed the present revision.

(2.) DURING the course of hearing, it could not be disputed that the petitioner was afforded six opportunities for producing her evidence and she did not conclude her evidence and thus the trial court closed her evidence by order. Concededly, neither the list of witnesses was filed on or before the date fixed for evidence of the petitioner nor any witness was sought to be summoned through court. On one of the dates fixed for evidence of the petitioner, the trial court ordered dasti summons but the petitioner did not collect the dasti summonses and it was thereafter that evidence of the petitioner was closed. I thus see no ground to interfere with the order under revision in exercise of my jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.