MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR, J. - (1.) THE crux of the facts and material, which needs a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant revision petition and emanating from the record, is that, initially, petitioner -plaintiff Dilbag Singh s/o Dharam Singh (for brevity "the plaintiff") has instituted a civil suit against his own brother Jagbir Singh respondent -defendant (for short "the defendant") for a decree of declaration, with a consequential relief of permanent injunction. Since the defendant did not appear, so, the trial Court ordered the ex parte proceedings against him. After accepting the ex parte evidence, the suit of plaintiff was decreed by the trial Court, by way of ex parte judgment dated 17.8.1998(Annexure P1) and decree (Annexure P2).
(2.) AS soon as, the defendant came to know about the ex parte decree, then, he moved an application (Annexure P3) for setting it aside under Order 9 Rule 13 read with section 151 CPC. The plaintiff refuted the prayer of defendant, filed the reply (Annexure P4), stoutly denied all the allegations contained in the application and prayed for its dismissal. Both the parties brought on record the evidence in order to substantiate their respective pleas and their evidence was closed by the trial Court. Thereafter, the plaintiff has moved an application for permission to examine his another brother Ram Mehar as an additional evidence to prove the family settlement/compromise between the parties. The trial Court dismissed the pointed application, by way of impugned order dated 16.10.2013 (Annexure P5).
(3.) 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.;