PAWAN KUMAR Vs. SURINDER PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff has approached this Court challenging the orders dated 11.12.2008 and 17.2.2009, passed by the learned court below, whereby the prayer of the petitioner-plaintiff for permitting him to lead evidence in rebuttal on the issues, the onus of which was on the respondents- defendants, has been dismissed.

(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts are that the petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell against the respondents-defendants, in which three issues were framed. The onus of issue No. 1 was on the plaintiff, whereas for issues No. 2 and 3, the onus was on the respondents-defendants. The plaintiff closed his evidence. Thereafter, the respondents-defendants led their evidence in defence and also in affirmative on the issues, the onus whereof was on them. It was at this stage that the petitioner plaintiff requested the court to permit him to lead evidence in rebuttal on the issues, the onus of which was on the respondents-defendants. The prayer was rejected by the learned trial court vide order dated 11.12.2008. Review of the order was sought, which was also rejected vide order dated 17.2.2009. It is these orders, which are impugned before this Court.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that while leading evidence on issue No. 1, the onus of which was on the petitioner plaintiff, he had not reserved his right to lead evidence in rebuttal. In fact, the entire dispute revolves around the agreement to sell projected by the petitioner plaintiff. The stand of the respondents-defendants from the very beginning is that the same is forged and fabricated document and keeping that in view, the petitioner was required to lead his entire evidence in one go and in fact, the evidence, which is now sought to be led in the form of expert witness, was required to be led at the initial stage while leading evidence on issue No. 1, the onus of which is on the petitioner-plaintiff. Reliance was placed upon Tejinder Kaur v. Krishan Singh and others, 2008(1) Civil Court Cases 813 (P&H).