Meena V. Gomber, J. - (1.) Heard at the admission stage itself.
(2.) The petitioners (defendants) have filed this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 30.11.2011 passed by Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 2, Sikar Headquarters Srimadhopur (Sikar) in Suit No. 29/2000 (70/2001) whereby the application filed by the petitioners under section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, had been dismissed.
(3.) Briefly stated facts of the case are that the respondent (plaintiff) had filed a suit for specific performance on the basis of an agreement to sell allegedly executed on 7.10.1989, whereupon the original defendant Samandar Singh (who had died during pendency of the suit on 27.11.2009), had put his thumb impression and brother Narpat Singh his signatures. In the written-statement filed by the petitioners it was denied that they ever sold any land to the plaintiff or any agreement was exe- cuted. The deceased Samandar Singh, who was the original defendant, denied putting any thumb impression. In the same manner Narpat Singh defendant also denied putting his signatures. The suit was contested by both the brothers till 2009 when the defendant Samandar Singh died on 27.11.2009. The issues were framed on the basis of pleadings and the suit re- mained pending from 2000 to 2011. After completion of plaintiffs evi- dence the defendants also examined three witnesses including petitioner Narpat Singh. Permission to file the fourth witness was ranted by the Trial Court, however, looking to the conduct of the defendants, cost of ! 500/- was imposed.;