Civil Revision No. 3897 of 2010 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 3897 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 8.7.2010 M/s Sood and Company Octoi Contractor Nagar Council ......Petitioner Versus Municipal Council Tanda Urmar .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Shri Satbir Rathore, Advocate, for the petitioner. HEMANT GUPTA, J (Oral). The petitioner is aggrieved against the order passed by the learned trial Court on 20.4.2010, whereby an application filed by the petitioner-plaintiff for permission to lead rebuttal evidence was declined. Earlier, an application filed by the petitioner for framing of the additional issues, was allowed on 7.1.2010. As many as 8 issues were framed. The onus to prove all such issues was on the defendant. Such issues arise out of the preliminary objections raised by the defendant. The defendant has made a statement that it does not want to lead evidence on such issues. Even though the defendant has made such statement, the plaintiff moved an application for permission to lead rebuttal evidence on such issues which has been Civil Revision No. 3897 of 2010 (O&M) [2] declined by the learned trial Court, vide the order impugned in the present petition. The right to lead rebuttal evidence arises to the plaintiff only in respect of those issues the onus of which was on the defendant. The issues framed are legal in nature on which the defendnats have led no evidence. Therefore, the petitioner-plaintiff is not entitled to lead any rebuttal evidence on the issues so framed. Consequently, I do not find any patent illegality or material irregularity in the impugned order, which may warrant interference by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. Hence, the present petition is dismissed. [ HEMANT GUPTA ] JUDGE 8.7.2010 ds