Civil Revision No. 1719 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 1719 of 2010 Date of decision : 16.3.2010 Amar Singh ....Petitioner Versus Ran Singh and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. Arvind MIttal, Advocate for the petitioner. S. D. ANAND, J. The petitioner herein applied for the leave of the learned Trial Court to adduce additional evidence. The learned Trial Court negatived the plea by observing that in this suit instituted in the year 2003, the evidence of the plaintiff-petitioner had been closed on 30.7.2009 and the evidence of the defendant having been closed on 11.9.2009, there was no justification for the allowance of the additional evidence plea. Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner argues that the impugned order deserves to be invalidated inasmuch as the documentation proposed to be tendered as additional evidence is part of the revenue record. Reliance, in support of the advocated plea, is placed on Phuman Singh Vs. Hazara Singh, 2009 (3) R.C.R. (Civil) 671. The plea raised is denuded of merit. The provisions of Order XVII Rule 17-A of the C.P.C. are no longer available for the Civil Revision No. 1719 of 2010 -2- exercise. The residuary provisions under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be said to be applicable in view of the fact that the plea raised is inordinately delayed and it is not the averment that the factum and availability of proposed additional evidence was not to the notice of the petitioner. The petition is held to be denuded of merit and is ordered to be dismissed in limine. March 16, 2010 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE