Civil Revision No. 3 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 3 of 2010 Date of Decision: January 07 , 2010 Dalel ...... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr.S.S.Momi, Advocate for the petitioner. **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Ajay Tewari, J. This is a petition against the order dated 9.12.2009 passed by the learned trial Court whereby application for additional evidence filed by the petitioner has been disallowed. The learned trial Court has taken into consideration the fact that no details of the documents which were sought to be proved or the purpose for which the same were required to be proved was mentioned in the application. Learned counsel has, however, argued that it was not for this reason that the application was dismissed but on the erroneous ground that the petitioner wants to delay the matter. Learned counsel has argued that in fact, the documents which are sought to be placed on record are public documents and the petitioner had to wage an arduous campaign to get the Civil Revision No. 3 of 2010 2 said documents under the Right to Information Act and, therefore, the finding that the petitioner wants to delay his own suit is clearly uncalled for. In my opinion even if this argument is correct yet the refusal of learned trial Court to permit the additional evidence on the ground that the application did not either contain the details of the documents or the object sought to be achieved by placing them on record cannot be faulted. It may be noticed that even in this petition no such information has been provided. Learned counsel has tried to argue that the documents Annexures P-2, P-3 and P-4 are self explanatory. This argument is misconceived as the effect of the documents would be seen only once they are admitted into evidence. No fault can be found with the order of the learned trial court in rejecting the application on the ground that the petitioner did not give the details thereof or the purpose for which they were sought to be placed on record. Consequently this revision petition is dismissed. Since the main case has been decided, the pending Civil Misc. Applications, if any, stand disposed of. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE January 07 , 2010 sunita