IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.4102 of 2008(O&M) Date of Decision 10.07.2009 Smt.Lila Devi ......Petitioner VERSUS Man Singh and others ......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Sachin Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J(ORAL): This revision petition is directed against the order dated 18.07.2008, passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karnal. The plaintiff-petitioner (herein referred as the petitioner) had set up her claim on the basis of agreement dated 26.05.2000 wherein she specifically stated that the agreement was got executed by Ram Krishan in her favour. However, the defendant-respondent (herein referred as the respondent) while countering the averments stated that Ram Kishan never entered into agreement to sell in favour of the petitioner. After the close of the plaintiff's evidence, the petitioner wanted to examine the expert witness in rebuttal. The trial Court, on the application of the respondent, has observed that the onus to prove the execution was upon the petitioner and having failed to do so, and having not reserved her right of rebuttal, as such, she cannot be allowed to examine the said witness at the rebuttal stage. Consequently, the trial Court allowed the application of the respondent and disallowed the petitioner to examine the expert. Civil Revision No.4102 of 2008(O&M) -2- Notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner could not be allowed to examine the expert in rebuttal when she did not reserve her right at the time she led evidence in affirmative. However, when once the trial Court has exercised its discretion while allowing the examination of expert for enabling to reach the truth of the matter, then such discretion should not be interfered at this revisional stage. The main purpose of the Court in collecting evidence is to remove the curtain from false hood and reach the truth with a view to impart complete justice to the parties. Even otherwise, the order allowing or disallowing an evidence, being purely of interim nature, the revision is not maintainable. Any way, the the suit is pending since 2002 and since the examination of expert could be helpful to the Court to reach the right conclusion, therefore, he could be examined even as a court witness. Under these circumstances, this revision petition is allowed with a direction to the trial Court to allow the plaintiff to examine the expert, subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as costs. However, the plaintiff is directed to close the rebuttal evidence within three months positively. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 10.07.2009 mamta-II