- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner-plaintiff.
(2.) BY the impugned order dated 03.03.2012, the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Phalodi, Jodhpur has summoned the Sub- Registrar on an application filed by the defendant No.2- Pabu Ram S/o Moola Ram under Order 16 Rule 14 read with Section 151 CPC as the additional Issue No.5A was framed by it on 07.01.2012, it was necessary to summon the defendant No.3- Sub-Registrar, Phalodi to ascertain the DLC rates and whether the stamp duty paid on the document in question was adequate or not. The petitioner-plaintiff being aggrieved by the said order dated 03.03.2012 has approached to this Court while invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India without laying any challenge to the order dated 07.01.2012. 3. Mr. Roshan Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner-plaintiff relying upon Apex Court's decision in the case of Bishwanath Rai Vs. Sachhidanand Singh reported in AIR 1971 SC 1949 (Para 6) submitted that the learned trial court has seriously erred in summoning the Sub-Registrar after the evidence of both the parties was closed before the said additional issue was framed.
(3.) LEARNED trial court has given its reasonings in the impugned order dated 03.03.2012 that once the additional issue has been framed about deficit of stamp duty/court fees, it considered expedient to summon the Sub-Registrar and, therefore, the application filed by the defendant No.2 under Order 16 Rule 14 read with Section 151 CPC, it has so directed.;