- (1.) C.M. No. 13868-CII of 2011 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Civil Revision No. 3506 of 2011 The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 23.4.2011, passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Gurgaon, Annexure P1, vide which application filed by petitioner-plaintiff for summoning witnesses for proving sale deed, allegedly executed by deceased Tota, with intention to get the thumb impression of deceased Tota compared with his alleged thumb impressions on the documents relied upon by petitioner-plaintiff in his case was dismissed.
(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.
(3.) Facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that a suit for declaration was filed by petitioner-plaintiff against respondents-defendants that he and pro forma respondents-defendants have become owners in possession of the land in dispute on the brief allegations that the land in dispute was mortgaged with possession by Tota, father of defendant no.1, in favour of Bharat Singh, who was ancestor of plaintiffs and pro forma respondents-defendants and that a receipt for Rs. 2,000/- dated 11.8.1967 was executed by mortgagor in favour of mortgagee and as the said mortgage had not been redeemed, hence, petitioner-plaintiff and pro forma respondents-defendants have become owners in possession of the same, after expiry of period of redemption. The suit has been contested by respondents-defendants on the plea that no such receipt for creating mortgage was ever executed by father of defendant no.1 in favour of predecessor-in-interest of plaintiffs and that no such mortgage was ever created.;