ANIL KUMAR PUROHIT Vs. ASHOK KUMAR PUROHIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of learned counsel for both parties, the writ petition has been heard finally on merits.

(2.) Instant writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner-defendant No.2, feeling aggrieved by the order dtd. 9/5/2022 passed by the Additional District Judge No.4, Jaipur District in Civil Suit No.69/2018, dismissing his application under Order VIII Rule 1(3) CPC and declining to take the original bank passbooks and bank statement of defendant No.1- Radha Kishan Purohit (now deceased) and of defendant No.2- Anil Kumar Purohit.

(3.) Brief facts of the case as revealed from the record are that the respondent No.1-plaintiff has filed a civil suit for partition and permanent injunction in respect of three immovable properties described in Para No.2 of the plaint. The suit has been resisted by the petitioner-defendant No.2 and in the written statements, a plea has been raised that an another immovable property Plot No. B-36, Anita Colony, Bajaj Nagar, Jaipur is also joint property of family, which has not been included by the plaintiff in the suit of partition and a counter claim has made in the written statement. In respect of this property, the defendant No.2 has pleaded that the property was purchased in the name of plaintiff and he was funded by father- defendant No.1-Radha Kishan Purohit (now deceased) as also by defendant No.2. As per the respective pleadings of parties, issues have been framed and suit is at the stage of recording plaintiff's evidence.