RAKESH KUMAR Vs. TELU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD and gone through the record.

(2.) PETITIONER has filed a suit against the respondents, for recovery of certain amount of money, on the ground that he had advanced the claimed money to the respondents, as part of sale consideration of certain property, which the respondents had agreed to sell him. It is alleged by the petitioner that the agreement failed, because of the respondents not coming forward to execute the sale deed, by the stipulated date. So, he filed suit for recovery of money.

(3.) PETITIONER , with a view to proving that he had sufficient funds, examined an employee from a bank to prove the entries in the bank accounts of himself and his mother. However, when the matter was at the final hearing stage, it was noticed by the counsel for the plaintiff -petitioner that by mistake record of the bank had been summoned for a period, which was not relevant. So, he moved an application, seeking leave of the Court to re -examine the witness, with the relevant record. That application was opposed by the respondents. Learned trial Court has disallowed that application, vide impugned order dated 12th September, 2011. So, the petitioner has approached this Court, for quashing the said order and directing the trial Court to let him re -examine the bank employee with the relevant record.