Ram Chand Gupta, J. - (1.) THE present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing/setting aside the impugned order dated 25.2.2011, Annexure P5, passed by the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Hoshiarpur, vide which permission sought by Petitioner -Plaintiff for appointment of Local Commissioner for recording statement of his witnesses, who are residing at Germany, has been declined.
(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned trial Court. Facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that present suit for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 10.1.2007 allegedly executed by Respondent -Defendant in favour of Petitioner -Plaintiff has been filed by present Petitioner. Respondent -Defendant denied the very execution of the agreement. Issues were framed. Case was fixed for evidence of Petitioner -Plaintiff when the present application has been filed for appointment of Local Commissioner for examining the witnesses, who are allegedly residing at Germany.
(3.) IT has been contended by learned Counsel for the Petitioner -Plaintiff that as the witnesses are residing at Germany, they could not come from there and hence, Local Commissioner be appointed for recording their statements. He has argued that agreement was executed at Germany as even Respondent -Defendant was at Germany at that time and however, Respondent -Defendant had denied this fact that he was at Germany and he even denied having executed agreement in favour of Petitioner -Plaintiff.;