AJMER SINGH Vs. KAVITA RANI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-defendant challenges the order dated 6.2.2017 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nabha (Annexure P/4) whereby the application by which the plea of adverse possession was sought to be taken in the written statement at the stage of rebuttal and arguments was dismissed.

(2.) The said application has been dismissed on the ground that case had been fixed for final arguments and counsel for the present petitioner had sought adjournments for addressing arguments. The issues were framed on 7.5.2015 and the trial having been completed, amendment was not permissible as on an earlier occasion also one application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 had been moved. Reliance was placed upon the judgment of the Apex Court in J.S. Samuel v. Gattu Mahesh 2012 (1) RCR Civil 903 (SC) to hold that there was no due diligence apart from the fact that a inconsistent plea was being taken was also one of the factor which weighed with the trial Court.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the mutually destructive pleas can be taken and the other side could be compensated by payment of costs. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Apex Court in L.C. Hanumanthappa (since dead) represented by his L.Rs. v. H.B. Shivakumar 2016 (1) SCC 332 and judgments in Mahi Pal and another v. Sohan and others 2016 (2) LAR 629 and Jaimal and others v. Uttamjit Singh and others 2017 (1) R.C.R. (Civil) 782. He further submits that he will not lead any such evidence and there will be no delay in the proceedings.