CW 5514/08 (Kamal Agarwal & Anr.vs.Sheela Devi & Ors.): Date of Order : 20/8/2008 1/2 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5514/2008 (Kamal Agarwal & Anr.vs.Sheela Devi & Ors.) DATE OF ORDER : 20/8/2008 HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.Anil Vyas, for the petitioner. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This petition is directed against the order dated 16/5/2008, whereby, the learned trial court rejected three applications filed by the plaintiff. The first application was filed by the plaintiff under Order 16 Rule 6 CPC seeking production of original sale deed in favour of Darshan Kumar Grover, who is stranger and third party to the suit. The suit for injunction has been filed by the plaintiff against the two defendants and said Darshan Kumar Grover is admittedly not a party before the learned trial court. Learned trial court has rejected this application finding that the said application is bound to delay the trial and secondly said Shri Darshan Kumar Grover being third party cannot be compelled to produce his sale deed before the trial court. 3. Another application has been filed by the plaintiff under Order 16 Rule 2, 3 and 4 seeking production of witness – Commissioner CW 5514/08 (Kamal Agarwal & Anr.vs.Sheela Devi & Ors.): Date of Order : 20/8/2008 2/2 who gave the report. Since his name was not included in the list of witnesses, the learned trial court has rejected the said application also. 4. The third application has been filed by the plaintiff under Order 13 Rule 10 seeking production of Commissioner's report filed in some other suit pending in another court. The learned trial court has rejected this application on the ground that since this application was not supported by any affidavit and secondly the plaintiff could have obtained certified copy of the said commissioner's report and produce the same before the trial court. Therefore, all the applications appeared to the trial court to be filed by the plaintiff for delaying the trial and therefore, rejected the same. 5. Having heard learned counsel, this court finds no error in the impugned order and writ petition is found to be devoid of merit. The same is accordingly dismissed. (DR.VINEET KOTHARI), J. Item no.10 baweja/-