AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hemant Gupta, J. (Oral)
The plaintiffs are in revision petition aggrieved against the order passed by the learned Trial Court declining to frame the following additional issue :
"Whether the defendants are leassees in possession for the period 18.7.1985 to 17.3.2004 vide lease deed dated 18.7.1985 and have also purchased the ownership right vide sale deed dated 10.4.1991 from Sunil, Sanjay, Anil and Nibhu as alleged ? OPD.
After the evidence was led by the defendants the plaintiffs moved an application for framing of the additional issue. The learned trial Court dismissed the said application holding that the version given by the defendants is rebuttal to the case of the plaintiffs and there is no need to frame additional issue.
In view of the judgment of this Court reported as Punjab Steel Corporation, Batala v. M.S.T.C. Ltd., 2001(4) RCR(Civil) 565 (P&H) : 2002(1) PLR 99 and Kashmir Kaur v. Bachan Kaur, 2000(2) RCR(Civil) 133 (P&H), the plaintiffs are entitled to lead evidence in rebuttal on all the issues. Consequently, it is open to the plaintiffs to rebut evidence in respect of evidence adduced by the defendants.
I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order warranting interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Dismissed.