SACHCHANAND Vs. SURESH CHANDRA & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-plaintiff has laid this writ petition to challenge the impugned order dated 7th of October, 2015 (Annex. 4) passed by learned Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate (West), Bhilwara (for short, 'learned Court below'), whereby learned Court below has rejected application of the petitioner under Order 11, Rule 12 and 14 read with Section 151 CPC in a suit for perpetual injunction.

(2.) In brief facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a suit for perpetual injunction against the respondents that first respondent may not raise any construction, contrary to the approved plan by the second respondent, on his plot and further he may not raise any construction at the set-back area. The suit is contested by first respondent and written statement is filed. In the written statement, the respondent has refuted all the averments contained in the plaint. While joining issue with the petitioner on construction, at the set-back area, it is pleaded by the respondent that construction raised at the set-back area has been regularised by the second respondent, UIT Bhilwara. Along with the written statement, a counter-claim is also filed by the respondent seeking relief of injunction against the petitioner.

(3.) After faming of the issues by the learned Court below when proceedings were going on for recording evidence of petitioner, he submitted an application (Annex.3) for summoning of the approved plan of the respondent and the entire file of UIT, Bhilwara whereby construction permission was accorded to the respondent. Upon considering the application, the learned Court below, by the impugned order declined the prayer of the petitioner observing that after framing of the issues petitioner has availed three opportunities to tender his evidence, but he is not appearing in the witness-box and therefore, the said application is designed to prolong the matter.