MOHAN SINGH Vs. KARAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in the present petition, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is to order dated May 19, 2007 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nawanshahr whereby application of the petitioner for issuing interrogatories to the Special Kanungo, Jalandhar was dismissed.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had earlier moved an application for issuing interrogatories to Special Kanugo, Jalandhar for tracing out the history of ownership of the suit land from the settlement of 1849-50 onwards. The application was allowed by the trial Court vide order dated March 7, 2006 the respondents-defendants having raised no objection to the grant of prayer made in the application. He submitted that inspite of the fact that petitioner had deposited requisite amount for issuing interrogatories, the needful was not done by the office. Accordingly, he moved the fresh application, which was rejected by the Trial Court vide impugned order. Order rejecting the application regarding issuing interrogatories, passed by the trial court on the ground that petitioner had already closed his oral evidence, is not in conformity with law as it was the fault of the office that interrogatories were not sent otherwise the petitioner had infact deposited the requisite amount after acceptance of the application. Still further, he submitted that since the claim made by the petitioner in the suit that the property in dispute is an HUF property, the past history of the ownership of the land in dispute was necessary for the purpose of just and proper decision in the suit.

(3.) HAVING heard learned counsel for the parties, I find merit in the contention raised by learned counsel for the respondents. Bare perusal of order XI Rule I of the Code of Civil Procedure, which is extracted below :-