JUDGEMENT
NIDHI GUPTA,J. -
(1.)Prayer in the present revision petition is for setting aside the order dtd. 4/9/2018 (Annexure P-12) passed by Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra whereby the application filed by respondents/defendants for permission for leading additional evidence has been allowed at the appellate stage.
(2.)Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners/plaintiffs instituted a civil suit dtd. 16/1/2013 for permanent injunction restraining the respondents/defendant nos. 1 and 2 from cutting and removing any trees from the land mentioned in para 1 of the plaint which is stated to be in the ownership and possession of the petitioners/plaintiffs. Vide judgment and decree dtd. 19/5/2015 (Annexure P-5) the said suit was decreed in favour of the petitioners/plaintiffs. Respondents filed C.A.No.316/2015 under Sec. 96 CPC against the said judgment and decree dtd. 19/5/2015, which is pending.
(3.)During pendency of this Civil Appeal, the respondents first filed application dtd. 22/9/2015 for appointment of Local Commissioner. However, vide statement dtd. 27/8/2018 the respondents withdrew this application. In the meantime, the respondents filed the present application dtd. 2/11/2015 for permission to lead additional evidence. It is this application which has been allowed wide impugned order dtd. 4/9/2018, whereby the Tehsildar, Shahbad (M) has been appointed as Local Commissioner to give a report specifically "as to whether the disputed trees are standing in the suit land owned by plaintiffs or the same are standing in the land of road owned by PWD Government." Hence, present revision petition.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.