IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.2882 of 2008 Date of Decision:- 19.05.2008 Krishan Pal and others ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.Ajay Pal Singh, Advocate vs. Ram Nath ....Respondent(s) through None. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 12.3.2008 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sonepat whereby an application under order 41 Rule 27 CPC moved by the respondent for permission to lead additional evidence has been allowed. From the perusal of the impugned order, it is apparent that the respondent has been permitted to place on record certified copy of a Kabuliyatnama dated 26.3.2001 allegedly executed in his favour by the petitioners regarding increase in the rate of rent as well as a certified copy of order dated 17.5.2001 passed by the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, Sonepat accepting the aforestated Kabuliyatnama. From the very nature of the documents, it is apparent that the documents are inter se parties and have been the subject-matter of the C.R. No.2882 of 2008 -2- proceedings before the Revenue Authorities. It may be true that the documents were very much in existence at the time when the suit was pending and could be produced by the respondent, however, the learned first appellate Court has accepted the plea that the documents could not be placed on record due to an inadvertent omission on the part of the respondent's counsel. Learned counsel for the petitioner though does not dispute the factum of these documents; he, however, contends that an appeal has already been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 17.5.2001, referred to above. If that is so, it is obvious that the above-stated order has not attained finality. This fact would, therefore, be kept in view by the first appellate Court while referring and/or placing reliance upon the said order. With these observations, this revision petition is disposed of. May 19, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE