BHAGWAN SINGH Vs. KEDAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed against the order of learned Addl. District Judge, Barmer dated September 12,1988 by which he closed the plaintiff petitioner's evidence and fixed 29th September, 1988 for the defendant's evidence. The facts of the case giving rise to the revision petition may be summarised thus;

(2.) THE plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for the recovery of Rs. 1,20,000/-under Order 37 Rules 1 and 2 C. P. C. on the basis of a promisory note. THE suit was resisted by the defendant. Issues were framed on May 24,1988. Issue No. 1 relates to the execution of the promisory note and receipt for consideration and its burden was placed upon the plaintiff. Issue No. 2 is regarding the effect of the non-compliance of the provisions of section 22. and 23 of the Rajasthan Money Lenders Act and the issue No. 3 relates to the admissibility of the pronote for want of stamp duty. THE burden of those two issues was placed upon the defendant. September 12,1988 was fixed for the plaintiff's evidence. On that day, plaintiff could not produce his evidence and as such his evidence was closed. THE same day, an application was moved under Order 18 Rule 3, C. P. C. reserving the right to produce evidence on issues No. 2 and 3 in rebuttal. No order was passed on it except mentioning that the plaintiff's evidence has already been closed.

(3.) AT this stage, the learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the plaintiff does not want to produce any evidence on issue No. l and he simply wants to produce evidence in rebuttal on issues No, 2 and 3.