Dinesh Maheshwari, J. - (1.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material placed on record, this Court is unable to find any jurisdictional error in the impugned order dt. 21.10.2011 whereby the learned Trial Court, dealing with the suit for specific performance has declined the prayer made by the plaintiffs petitioners for an opportunity to lead evidence in rebuttal.
(2.) THE learned Trial Court has precisely observed that the plaintiffs -petitioners did not reserve their right of leading evidence in rebuttal before the defendants entered in evidence and in that position, the right could not be acceded to the petitioners for leading evidence in rebuttal. The learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to and relied upon the decision of this Court in Gad Singh & Ors. vs. Phool Chand & Anr.,, 1997 DNJ (Raj.) 567 to submit that even when the right of rebuttal evidence had not been reserved, opportunity could be extended. The learned counsel has also referred to the decision of this Court in L.M.P. Precession Engineering Company(P) Ltd. vs. Ram Narayan,, 2004 (2) RLW 712.
(3.) IN L.M.P. Precession (supra), this Court held that the plaintiff shall have right of leading evidence in rebuttal if earlier he has led evidence touching his case only. This decision has no bearing on the question involved herein. In the present case, the plaintiffs have been declined the permission for leading rebuttal evidence for the reason that they failed to reserve such a right at the relevant stage.;