CR No. 1776 of 2010 (O&M) 1 In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Decided on 28.7.2010. Rajpal Singh --Petitioner vs. Rajbir Singh -- Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Ms.R.P.Dudeja,Advocate,for the petitioner Mr.Pankaj Bali,Advocate,for the respondent Rakesh Kumar Jain, J, This revision petition is directed against order of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karnal dated 3.3.2010 by which application filed by the defendant/petitioner under Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short,CPC) , for leading additional evidence has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in a suit for specific performance filed by the plaintiff/respondent, the petitioner had set up a case that agreement to sell is forged one as the prevalent market rate CR No. 1776 of 2010 (O&M) 2 of agricultural land in the concerned area was not less than Rs.8 lacs per acre, whereas the agreement is alleged to be of only Rs. 4 lacs per acre. It is submitted that the petitioner had filed an application for the purpose of placing on record the sale deed pertaining to the land sold in the vicinity during the said period for Rs.8 lacs per acre. The learned Court below rejected the application on the ground that firstly, the Court cannot exercise inherent jurisdiction under Section 151 of the CPC for the purpose of allowing additional evidence because the said provision has been deleted from the CPC. Secondly, case of the defendant/petitioner is that the agreement is forged one, therefore, additional evidence sought to be brought on record is of no use as it would not serve any purpose. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that this fact was within the knowledge of the petitioner, therefore, he cannot be allowed to lead additional evidence at the stage of rebuttal and arguments. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that this revision petition deserves to succeed because by leading additional evidence to the effect that price of land in the vicinity where the land is allegedly agreed to be sold is not less than Rs. 8 lacs per acre, the defendant is trying to prove an additional fact that the agreement to sell is a forged document. Learned counsel for the respondent has stated that he may also be granted permission to tender the sale deed, as according to him, prevalent market rate was even Rs.2 lacs per acre when the agreement to sell was entered into. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, present petition is allowed and the petitioner is granted liberty to place on record CR No. 1776 of 2010 (O&M) 3 sale deed of Rs. 8 lacs per acre, as prayed for in accordance with law. Respondent is also granted liberty to place sale deed of Rs.2 lacs per acre on record as stated in accordance with law on or before the date already fixed before the Court below. With these observations, the present petition is disposed of. 28.7.2010 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge