BHAGWANT KAUR Vs. HARDEEP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Order dated 23rd April, 1998, is impugned in this revision. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration to the effect that she is the owner of half share of the land in dispute and sale executed by defendant No. 1 in favour of defendant No. 2 and 3 out of the said land was illegal void and ineffective. While praying for the relief of possession, the plaintiff also prayed for the relief of injunction. It was pleaded by the plaintiff that she is the sister of Jeet Singh and both of them are only heirs of deceased Fauja Singh and she was entitled to half share in the property of her deceased father. The suit was contested by the defendants, Jeet Singh had died in the meanwhile. His heirs were brought on record who also contested the suit along with other defendants.

(2.) During the pendency of the suit the plaintiff filed an application for additional evidence. It was prayed that during the examination of DW Mann Singh, while being re-examined by the defendants, questions were put in regard to the entries in the Bahi. The Bahi is written by different persons. Thus, she wanted to produce the Bahi and to examine the persons who had made entries in the Bahi. This application was opposed and contested by the defendant and was dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 23rd April, 1998 which is assailed in this revision as already noticed.

(3.) The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that though the Bahi was in possession of the petitioner but the applicant was not aware about its relevancy. Now she wanted to produce the Bahi and examine the witnesses who had made entries in it to show that she is the sister of Jeet Singh. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents contended that no reason whatsoever has been stated in the application as to why the Bahi was not produce earlier and in any case there is no justification for allowing the application within the purview and scope of order 18, Rule 17-A of the Code of Civil Procedure.