Civil Revision No.5322 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision No.5322 of 2008 Date of Decision:-July 28,2009 Shiv Mandir Lakshmi Narain Ji Mandir & Anr. ....Petitioners Versus Sohan Lal ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reports or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported to the Digest? Present: Shri Jai Bhagwan, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri V.M.Gupta, Advocate for the respondent. ORDER Surya Kant, J. (Oral): This revision petition is directed against the order dated 11.8.2008 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Patiala, whereby an application moved by the petitioner-plaintiff purportedly for leading additional evidence, has been declined. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, counsel for the parties have been heard. It transpires that Dr.Ravinder Kumar Kapoor, who is GPA of plaintiffs-petitioner, during the course of his deposition in examination-in-chief, had tendered certain documents, however, due to an objection raised by the respondent-defendant, those Civil Revision No.5322 of 2008 2 documents could not be exhibited and remained marked only. With a view to bring those documents in evidence by getting them exhibited, the petitioner has moved the present application. It further transpires that the documents, which the petitioner wants to bring on record, are mostly official documents including the 'site plan' and 'building permit' from the Municipal record, as well as one bahi also. Since the petitioner-plaintiff has appended these documents alongwith his affidavit filed in lieu of the examination-in- chief and the same could not be exhibited due to an objection raised by the respondent-defendant, the petitioner is entitled in law to bring the same on record, though their evidentiary value, shall be considered by the trial court at an appropriate stage. For the reasons aforesaid, the revision petition is allowed to the extent that the impugned order dated 11.8.2008 is set aside and the petitioner-plaintiff is permitted to get the documents in question exhibited as per law. However, the petitioner-plaintiff shall not be entitled to lead other additional evidence. Dasti. (Surya Kant) Judge 28.7.2009 AS