MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR ,J. - (1.) CONCISELY , the facts & material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal of the instant petition and emanating from the record are that, initially petitioner -plaintiff -Rakesh Kumar son of Rajinder Pal(for brevity "the plaintiff") has instituted the civil suit(Annexure P -1) for a decree of declaration with a consequential relief of permanent injunction, restraining respondent -defendant Nutan Bhatia wife of Sunil Bhatia(for short "the defendant") from alienating the property in dispute to any other person, in any manner. Since, the defendant did not appear, so, ex parte proceedings were ordered against her by the trial Court.
(2.) HAVING closed the ex parte evidence, the plaintiff moved an application(Annexure P -3), for granting permission him to lead additional evidence. The trial Court dismissed his application for additional evidence, vide impugned order dated 29.11.2013. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner -plaintiff has preferred the present petition, invoking the superintendence jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) AS indicated here -in -above, since the defendant did not appear despite service, so, ex parte proceedings were ordered against her by the trial Court. Therefore, in exercise of power conferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, I hereby exempt the issuance of notice to the respondent -defendant in the instant petition as well.;