AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard.
The present petition is against the order dated 23.03.2018, passed by First Civil Judge Class- II, Raipur (C.G.) in Civil Suit No.353-A/2008, whereby
an application under Order 6 Rule 18 CPC preferred by the petitioners was dismissed.
Perusal of the order-sheet as would reveal that the amendment which was prayed for under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was allowed by the Court below
on 09.03.2016, thereafter, the document pursuant to the amendment made was also placed on record, which was taken into the record. Thereafter, on
28.06.2016 the right to lead evidence of the petitioners/defendants was closed and the case was fixed for arguments. The trial Court after hearing the
parties dismissed the case on 21.07.2016. Thereafter, the respondents/plaintiffs preferred an appeal and the appellate Court remanded the case back
to the trial Court for adjudication afresh.
It is contended before this Court that now the amendment which was earlier allowed on 09.03.2016 requires to be incorporated and the evidence
has to be adduced on the document so admitted on record, therefore, the trial Court should have allowed the petition. The order-sheet as would reveal
that initially when the amendment was incorporated and the documents were admitted on record, the defendants/petitioners herein failed to produce
any evidence, whereby their right to lead evidence was closed. Thereafter, when the case was further taken up in appeal by the plaintiffs/respondents,
no cross-objection was made against such closure of the evidence and no submission was made to incorporate the amendment therein. Subsequently,
when the case has been remanded, the petitioner again prays for to incorporate the amendment and to adduce the evidence. Considering the time
lapse in between the parties and the subsequent proceedings wherein the right to lead evidence was closed on the earlier occasion before dismissing
of the suit, when the suit is been further remanded subsequently by the appellate Court, allowing the amendment to adduce evidence would amount to
reopening of the case for which no prayer was made on the earlier occasion even during the appeal. In such case I do not find any merit in this case
so as to interfere in exercise of powers vested under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.