IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 37 of 2010. Decided on : July 23, 2010. Teku …Petitioner. Versus Jhabe Ram …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Sood, Advocate. For respondents 1 to 6 Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate. Surjit Singh, J. (Oral) Heard and gone through the record. 2. Petitioner has filed a suit for specific performance of agreement, with regard to re-conveyance of certain property, which he had sold to the defendant earlier. Agreement for re-conveyance was made between the parties at the time, when the property was agreed to be sold by the petitioner-plaintiff. However, agreement could not be given effect to within the time stipulated therein. Therefore, another agreement was executed and the time for re-conveyance was extended. Petitioner based his suit on the second agreement. His suit was dismissed by the trial Court, with the finding that after sale of the suit property in favour of respondent-defendant, the latter had raised loan from a bank, which had not been re-paid. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? - 2 - Appeal has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment of the trial Court, which is now pending in the Court of District Judge. He filed an application seeking leave of the Court to lead additional evidence, with respect to original agreement. That application has been dismissed by impugned order dated 24.12.2009 passed by the District Judge. 3. I have heard the counsel for the parties. 4. It is not in dispute that in the second agreement on which the suit was based, there is reference to the first agreement also. If that is so, prima facie, first agreement which was sought to be proved by way of additional evidence, is a relevant piece of evidence and, therefore, that document would have definitely helped the Court in arriving at right conclusion. Hence, present petition is allowed. Impugned order is set aside and the prayer for leading additional evidence, as made by the petitioner, in the application submitted to the District Judge, is granted, subject to payment of costs of Rs.1,000/-. Parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 9.8.2010. July 23, 2010 (PC). (Surjit Singh), J.