DINESH MEHTA,J. - (1.) The case has come up for consideration of an application seeking vacation of interim order dated 24.02.2015 passed by this Court in the present writ petition, wherein the petitioner has challenged the order dated 05.01.2015, vide which the learned Trial Court has permitted the rejoinder/reapplication filed by the plaintiff to be taken on record.
(2.) Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction and seeking possession against the defendant-petitioner. Pursuant to the suit filed by the plaintiff, the petitioner filed written statement, contending in Para No.5 and 11 thereof, that the land in question had been sold orally by the plaintiff to the defendant No.2 about 20 years ago. It would be worthwhile to reproduce Paras No.5 and 11 of the written statement, which is as under:- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...
(3.) Faced with such written statement, the plaintiff filed an application dated 08.02.2012 under Order 8, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and sought leave to place reapplication on record. The said reapplication came to be allowed by the learned Court below vide its order impugned. While allowing the reapplication vide order dated 05.01.2015, the learned Court below has simply observed that certain new facts have been stated by the plaintiff in his written statement, to which filing of rejoinder is necessary.;