Court No. - 7
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 1731 of 2021 Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Bhardwaj And 2 Others Respondent :- Smt. Kamla Devi And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- Rishabh Agarwal,Tarun Agrawal
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
Amendment application is allowed.
Necessary amendment be carried out forthwith.
By means of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has questioned the correctness of the order dated 31.5.2019 passed in O.S. No.397 of 1997 for framing additional issues. The said order was further challenged in the revision before the higher Court that also came to be rejected on 3.2.2021 confirming the order of the trial court dated 31.5.2019.
It has been strenuously argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that certain documents were required to be called for to properly adjudicate the case and therefore, in the interest of justice, even at the stage of adducing evidence the application for framing additional issues ought to have been allowed in order to meet the ends of justice.
Per contra, it has been argued by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that eight substantial issues had already been framed in the counter claim filed in O.S. No.397 of 1997 and further eight issues have been framed in the connected suit between the same parties bearing O.S. No.197 of 1998.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner having already withdrawn his plaint case in O.S. No.397 of 1997, it is the contesting respondent who had filed the counter claim, becomes duty bound to prove his case.
Besides above, the court sitting in revision vide its order dated 3.2.2021 had left it open for the parties that in the event they had any grievance, it might take recourse to the remedy as contained in Order XIV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for framing additional issues.
On a query being made to the learned counsel for the petitioner as to what prejudice is being caused to the petitioners in the event the additional issues are not framed, he could not give any satisfactory reply.
I am of the view that once the parties have led evidence on the issues already framed, it is the sole discretion of the trial court to frame additional issues if it thinks necessary so to do justice in a case.
Accordingly, I decline to interfere with the order dated 31.5.2019 passed by the trial court and the order of the revisional court dated 3.2.2021 confirming the order of the trial court in exercise of supervisory power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
The petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 25.10.2021 SP