MOHIT Vs. RISHPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners-defendants are aggrieved of the impugned order whereby the application for bringing on record the sale deeds by way of additional evidence at the stage of final arguments, has been declined.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent-plaintiff had filed suit for declaration and permanent injunction by laying challenge to the Will executed by Shiv Kumar whereas the defendants denied the averments as Shiv Kumar after selling the agricultural land purchased the agricultural land in the name of his sons. The documents are per se admissible and can be tendered into evidence subject to mode of proof, as it will help the Court in adjudication of the lis.

(3.) Mr. Bansal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that factum of the sale deeds was specifically pleaded in the written statement. No explanation has come forward as to how sale deeds could not be placed, despite exercise of due diligence. He further submitted that the application for additional evidence is just an attempt to fill up the lacuna, thus, urges this Court for dismissal of the revision petition.