IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CR NO.2263/2009 Date of Decision:24.4.2009. Ram Sarup ..........Petitioner. Versus Karma and another ..........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present: Mr. Sudhir Kumar,Advocate for the petitioner. JASWANT SINGH,J(Oral). Petitioner-defendant no.2 by filing the present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has prayed for quashing of the order dated 21.3.2009 (Annexure P/2) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Panipat, whereby his prayer for submitting supplementary affidavits of the defence witnesses has been declined. It is averred that respondent no.1-plaintiff in a suit for specific performance of the agreement dated 17.1.2002 and alternative relief of damages and possession, after completion of the defendant's evidence, moved an application for amendment of the plaint whereby he sought deletion of the alternative relief of damages and possession. That amendment was allowed. Petitioner-defendant no.2 filed amended written statement to the amended plaint. It is under these circumstances that the petitioner filed an application under Section 151 CPC for producing supplementary affidavits of defence CR NO.2263/2009 2 witnesses, which prayer was declined by the learned trial court vide order impugned in this revision petition. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-defendant no.2 and perused the record. I find no infirmity in the impugned order. It is not disputed that by way of amendment, whereby alternative relief of damages and possession was deleted, respondent no.1-plaintiff neither added anything new to the case nor led any evidence whatsoever. In these facts and circumstances learned trial court has rightly found that in the absence of any new evidence having been led by the plaintiff, no opportunity could be given to the defendant to file supplementary affidavits. No merit. Dismissed. 24.4.2009. (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge