RAGHBIR SINGH Vs. MALKIAT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision is filed against the order of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Fatehgarh Sahib, dated June 11, 1996, refusing the application filed by the petitioner-a-plaintiff to permit the petitioner to lead additional evidence.

(2.) The plaintiff after examining two witnesses closed the evidence. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed an application to permit him to lead further evidence to prove the two disputed Wills executed by the brothers of the plaintiff. That application was dismissed by the Trial Court on the ground that the conditions as required under Rule 17-A of Order XVIII are not satisfied. The plaintiff has therefore, filed this revision petition.

(3.) It is admitted fact that before closure of the evidence, the plaintiff took over the summons to the witnesses who are now sought to be examined. The diet money .not issued. The petitioner closed the evidence without seeking further time. The plaintiff now wants to examine those two witnesses. The Trial Court dis-. missed the application on the ground that the. conditions required under Rule 17A of Order XVIII are not satisfied. I am of the opinion that Rule 17A cannot be treated as a bar to permit the plaintiff to lead further evidence. Sub-rule (4)of Rule 2 of Order XVIII gives ample power to the Court to permit any party to examine any witness at any stage Thus, it is clear that apart from Rule 17A, the Court has got power to permit any party to examine any other witnesses at any stage.