IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 3107 of 2011 Date of decision: 10.5.2011 Om Parkash and another … Petitioners versus Jayanti Parsad and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: Mr. R.M.Singh, Advocate for the petitioners ... ARVIND KUMAR, J: The present petitioners and the proforma respondents are the plaintiffs in the suit for declaration with consequential relief of permanent injunction titled Sukh Ram and others v. Jayanti Parsad and another. They are aggrieved with order dated 21.2.2011 passed by the Additional Civil Judge(Sr.Division), Hathin, by virtue of which their application for tendering documents in rebuttal or by way of additional evidence has been dismissed. Heard. A discretion vests in the Court to permit a party to produce evidence at a later stage if it is satisfied that the evidence was not within his knowledge or could not be produced despite the due diligence. In the instant case, the pedigree-table, voters’ list, death certificate etc., have been placed on record and thus, they were very well in the knowledge of the plaintiffs when an opportunity was given to them to lead evidence and it also cannot be said that they could not be produced despite the due diligence. The relevancy of the said documents has also not been pointed out. So far as the evidence in rebuttal is concerned, it has not been made clear as to on which issue, they want to lead evidence in rebuttal. Counsel for the petitioners has also not been able to convince this Court in this C.R. No. 3107 of 2011 -2- regard. In this back-drop of the facts, the application has rightly been dismissed. No interference is called. The revision petition is dismissed. May 10, 2011 ( ARVIND KUMAR ) JS JUDGE