Civil Revision No. 2582 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 2582 of 2011 Date of Decision: 21.4.2011 *** Gurmohan Singh .. Petitioner Vs. Gurdeep Singh .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present:- Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Advocate for the petitioner. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The application of the petitioner-plaintiff for leading additional evidence has been dismissed vide order dated 11.4.2001, which has necessitated him to file the instant revision petition. Heard. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon the case of Surinder Kumar Vs. Prem Lata 1997(2) CCC 512(P&H) to contend that the application for additional evidence can be allowed at any stage and the Court below must have allowed the application, especially when the documents sought to be produced by way of additional evidence are public documents and their authenticity cannot be doubted. No doubt the application for leading additional evidence can be allowed at any stage, but the same cannot be allowed in a routine manner. The aforesaid application was filed at the rebuttal stage seeking to produce on record the certified copies of jamabandies for the year 2002-03, certified copies of khasra girdawaris and Aksh-shijra, without mentioning the purpose of there being produced on record. Even the year/ period of said khasra girdawaries and Aksh-shijra, to which they pertain was mentioned in the application. It was not even shown the necessary of producing on record such documents and the fact that despite exercise of due diligence the plaintiff could not produce Civil Revision No. 2582 of 2011 2 the same earlier when his evidence was going on. Hence, the petitioner cannot derive any benefit from Surinder Kumar's case (supra). There is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. The revision petition, being without merit, is accordingly dismissed in limine. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE April 21 , 2011 Jiten