Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) THIS petition is against the order dated 12.12.2012 by which application of the plaintiff for producing additional evidence has been declined.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff has submitted that in the additional evidence, he wanted to produce the registered Will, which is the very basis of the suit. He has referred to the decision of this Court in the case of "Pawan Kumar Vs. Raj Kumar and others", 2007(1) RCR (Civil) 385, to contend that the Court still has inherent power to allow additional evidence in case it is necessary for the just and proper adjudication of the case. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that there is no error in the order passed by the Court below because before closing the evidence of the plaintiff, 23 opportunities were granted to him besides last opportunity and opportunity on payment of cost. The evidence was closed on 1.6.2012, which was not challenged by him and now an application has been filed to lead additional evidence.
(3.) I have heard both the learned counsel for the parties and examined the record.;