- (1.) The petitioners are aggrieved by order dated 2.12.2013 passed by Addl. District & Sessions Judge No.18, Jaipur Metropolitan, whereby the learned Judge has dismissed an application under Order 8, Rule 9 CPC and has declined to permit the petitioners to file a rejoinder to the written statement filed by the respondent-defendants.
(2.) Mr. P.S. Sirohi, the learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently contended that in the written statement certain new facts were brought on record which need to be replied by the petitioners. According to the learned counsel, new facts were narrated in para Nos.1, 2 and 4 of the written statement. Therefore, according to him, the learned Judge was not justified in rejecting the application for bringing the rejoinder on record.
(3.) Heard the learned counsel, and perused the impugned order and also considered the plaint, the written statement and the proposed rejoinder.;