PARDEEP KUMAR Vs. PRABHA BAKSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by learned Munsiff, Kathuas order of September 15, 2007, allowing plaintiff/respondent, Prabha Bakshis application for production of additional evidence, the petitioners/defendants have approached this Court for setting it aside, on the ground, that the trial Court had illegally exercised jurisdiction in permitting plaintiff/respondent to lead additional evidence, when her seven years old suit, seeking partition of a two storeyed residential house, belonging to one Sat Paul Sharma, had been slated for final hearing.

(2.) TO appreciate the submissions made at the Bar, reasoning giving by learned Munsiff, in allowing the application needs to be noticed. This reads, thus: -

(3.) THE view taken by learned Munsiff, that the Court has ample power to examine any witness, at any stage and the power can be exercised, even if, the conditionalities prescribed under Order XVIII Rule 17 -A of the Code of Civil Procedure, are not satisfied, is too wide a proposition, which the law may not contemplate for acceptance.