JAIPAL Vs. HARI DASS AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 6.8.2016 (Annexure P-5) passed by Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kalka, whereby, application moved by the plaintiff-petitioner for leading additional evidence has been dismissed.

(2.) Briefly, the facts of the case are that the plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for decree of possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 13.5.2010 along with consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendant-respondents from selling, mortgaging and alienating the land in dispute till the decision of the case.

(3.) Written statement to the suit was filed by the respondents and agreement to sell was denied. As per version of the defendant-respondents, the signatures of defendant No.1 and thumb impression of deceased-Jai Pal were obtained on blank papers. The petitioner filed an application before the Court below seeking permission to adduce additional evidence by way of examination Sh. Shyam Lal, who was the scribe as well as witness to the agreement to sell. Reply of the application was filed and the same was dismissed vide order dated 6.8.2016 on the ground that applicant was having knowledge that Shyam Lal scribed the agreement to sell at the time of his evidence and as such he was required to lead his evidence at that time to prove his case. It was also held that the application was not filed with bona fide intention and filed just to fill up the lacunae of the case.