C.R.6282 of 2006 {1} HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.6282 of 2006 Date of decision : 27.11.2006 Rajinder ........Petitioner versus Maruti Udyog Ltd. ........Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. Present : Mr.R.K.Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. * * * ORDER HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral) The challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated 8.11.2006, passed by the learned trial Court, whereby an application for permission to lead additional evidence was declined on the ground that the averments made in the application are vague as no detail of the judgment and decree has been given. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to para No.2 of the application to contend that the certified copies of the judgment and decree, which are sought to be produced in additional evidence, were attached with the application and, therefore, the Court was not justified in declining the said application. As a matter of fact, even in the revision petition the petitioner has not disclosed the details of the judgment and decree which are sought to be produced in evidence. No detail of the Court or the subject matter has been given in the application or in the revision petition which would show the relying upon of such documents in respect of which the evidence now sought to be produced. In view of the above, I do not find any illegality or C.R.6282 of 2006 {2} irregularity in the orders passed by the learned trial Court which may warrant interference by this Court in its revisional jurisdiction. Dismissed. (HEMANT GUPTA) November 27, 2006 JUDGE *mohinder