Civil Revision No. 5959 of 2008 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 5959 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision : 22.1.2009 Sudarshan Kumar and another ..... Petitioners vs Harinder Singh and others ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Naresh Kaushal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 1.10.2008 passed by the learned Court below whereby the petitioners had not been permitted to lead evidence. Briefly, the facts of the case are that during the pendency of a suit filed by respondent no. 1 for possession by way of separation of 2/9th share i.e. Land measuring 6865 square feet out of total area 30895 square feet approximately of joint ancestral property, the petitioners purchased part of the suit property. On their application, they were impleaded as defendants in the suit. Subsequently, they filed written statement and now are seeking to lead evidence which was declined by the learned court below. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that once they have been permitted to file written statement, they should be further permitted to lead evidence in support thereof. However, I do not find any merit in the arguments raised. It is a case where a part of the suit property was purchased by the petitioners during the pendency of the suit where the principles of lis pendens was otherwise applicable. Even though they have been impleaded as defendants and would merely step in the shoes of their vendors and will not have any claim better than the defendants. It is not disputed that the parties to the dispute have already led their evidence. The witnesses of plaintiff/respondent no.1 had already been cross-examined by the vendors of the petitioners. The prayer of the petitioners that witnesses of the Civil Revision No. 5959 of 2008 (2) plaintiff/respondent no. 1 should be recalled for their re-examination cannot be permitted. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Nothing said hereinabove would adversely affect the case of any of the parties before the court below which shall be decided on the basis of evidence to be led by the parties. 22.1.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge