Ram Chand Gupta, J. - (1.) THE present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing/setting aside order dated 24.4.2010 passed by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kaithal, Haryana, Annexure P1, vide which application filed by Petitioner -Defendant for not permitting him to lead evidence in rebuttal by way of producing hand writing/ finger print expert was dismissed.
(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned trial Court. Brief facts relevant for the decision of revision petition are that Respondent -Plaintiffs filed a civil suit against Petitioner -Defendant for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 1.9.2004. Petitioner -Defendant filed written statement as no such agreement as relied upon by Respondent -Plaintiffs was ever entered into and that alleged agreement to sell is void being not executed by Petitioner -Defendant. From the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by learned trial court on 12.12.2006: 1) Whether the Defendant had agreed to sell the suit land to the Plaintiffs vide agreement to sell dated 1.9.04 for a sale consideration of Rs. 5,55,000/ - per acre as alleged? OPP 2) Whether the Defendant had received the amount money of Rs. 2,50,000/ - from the Plaintiffs on 1.9.04 vide receipt? OPP 3) Whether the Defendant had agreed to execute the sale deed on or before 20.5.05? OPP 4) Whether the Plaintiffs are ready and willing to perform part of contract, if so its effect? OPP 5) Whether the suit of Plaintiffs is not maintainable in the present form? OPD 6) Whether the civil court have no jurisdiction to try and decide this suit? OPD 7) Whether the Plaintiffs have no locus standi and or cause of action to file the suit ? OPD 8) Whether the suit is bad for want of ad valorem court fees? OPD 9) Relief.
(3.) CASE was fixed for evidence of Respondent -Plaintiffs. After availing several opportunities six witnesses were examined by Respondent -Plaintiffs and thereafter evidence was closed. Petitioner -Defendant also closed evidence on 3.1.2009 and the case was adjourned for arguments.;