SHRAVAN KUMAR SONI Vs. OMPRAKASH AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner-defendant challenging the order dated 29.5.13 passed by the Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Srimadhopur, District Sikar (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court'), whereby the trial court has rejected the application of the petitioner-defendant seeking framing of additional issue in the suit.

(2.) In the instant case it appears that the respondent No.1-plaintiff has filed the suit being No. 17/12 against the petitioner and the respondent Nos 2 and 3 for declaration, eviction and recovery of rent in respect of the suit property. The said suit has been resisted by the petitioner by filing the written statement. From the pleadings of the parties, the trial court had framed as many as 11 issues on 12.12.12. The petitioner-defendant subsequently appears to have submitted the application requesting the court to frame an additional issue in respect of the contentions raised by the petitioner-defendant in para 5 of his written statement. The said application has been rejected by the trial court vide the impugned order against which the present petition has been filed.

(3.) It has been sought to be submitted by the learned counsel Mr. Bharat Vyas for the petitioner that the title of the respondent No.1-plaintiff was defective inasmuch as Shri Bhuramal, from whom the plaintiff had purchased the suit shop in the year 2004, had purchased the same from Sunil, who was one of the sons of Kastoor Chand, and that the other sons and daughters of Kastoor Chand were not party to the said sale-deed. According to him the trial court was required to frame an issue with regard to the said contention. Relying upon the provisions contained in Order XIV Rule 1 of CPC, he submitted that the trial court has committed an error in not framing the issue with regard to the fact asserted by the plaintiff and denied by the defendants.