RAM RATTAN Vs. ANAND PANDIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this court to challenge the order dated 6.1.2007 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar dismissing an application moved by the petitioner for recall of order dated 18.4.2006 vide which plaintiff-respondents were permitted to examine Handwriting Expert in rebuttal.

(2.) THE petitioner claimed that the evidence of the petitioner defendant was closed on 7.2.2006 and thereafter the case was adjourned to 29.3.2006 for rebuttal and arguments. It is the case of the petitioner that issues framed in the suit did not leave any scope for examining Handwriting Expert in rebuttal. It was claimed that the application moved for examining Handwriting Expert in rebuttal was not supplied nor reply was sought from the counsel for the petitioner and the same was allowed without giving opportunity of hearing. The petitioner came to know about the order dated 8.9.2006 when the expert appeared. It was claimed that the plaintiffs had no right to examine Handwriting Expert in rebuttal as there was no such issue.

(3.) IT was denied that the petitioner came to know about the order on 8.9.2006 as claimed. It was further the case of the respondent-plaintiffs that when Expert appeared the case was adjourned to 5.5.2006.On the said date, counsel for the defendant was present and PW 4 was examined and photographs were taken by expert. Thus, the averments made in the application were denied.