- (1.) RAM Janam Singh, J. Kali Charan has filed this revision against the order dated 25-1-1993 passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Meerut with the allegation that the learned trial Court has not given sufficient opportunity to adduce evidence to the revisionist. He has further alleged that the learned trial Court should evaluate the evidence on record properly.
(2.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the records care fully. The learned Additional Commis sioner, alter hearing both the parties ar rived at a conclusion that the finding given by the learned trial Court is not against the fact and law. The relevant documentary evidence as already been filed by the revisionist and the file which he wanted to summon was not needed as per the findings given by the learned trial Court. The learned trial Court has also directed the revisionist to file any documentary or oral evidence on that date i. e. 26-6-92. All these points show that the latches are on the part of the revisionist and both the Courts below have not committed any il legality in rejecting the request for adduc ing further evidence which was needed by the revisionist. With this observation, I am of the view that the revision is against on inter locutory order hence, it deserves dismissal. The revision has no force and therefore, is dismissed. Revision dismissed. .;