/\^^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PBTITION J 227} No. 4833 of 2011 PETITIONBR DBFBNDANT N0. 1 RB8PONDENTS PLAIKTIETS VERSUS 1. 2. 3. Dwarika Gupta S/o Late MaiigU Prasad Gupta, aged about 44 years, R/o BiUia, Tahsil Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.). Smt Seeta Devi Agrawal, aged about 66 years, W/o Moolchaiid Agrawal, R/o Maa Bhagwati Rice Mm, Bilha, Talisil Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.). The State of Chhattisgarh Through The CoUector, Bilaspur (C.G.). Tahsildar, Bilha, District BHaspiir (C.G.). WMT PBTITIQN UNDBR JURTICLB 2^ OF INDIA. (SB :Honyble WSx. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present:- Shri Goutam Bhaduri, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Akliil Agrawal, P.L. for the State/respondents No. 2 85 3. Respondent No. 1 not noticed. ORAL- ORDER (Passedoa 25/08/2011) 1. By fhis petition under Ardcle 227 of the Constitution of India petitioner has challenged fhe legaHty aiid propriety of fhe order dated 22/7/2011 passed by Civil Judge Class-1, BiUia District BUaspur (C.G.) m civil suit No. 20-A/2011 whereby ia the Ught of previous order dated 13/8/2010 right to cross examiaation plamtiGFs witaess to defendaat has been closed aad Court below has disniissed fhe application fUed under Order 18 Rule 17 read wifh Section 151 ofthe Civil Procedure Code, 1908. 2, Shri Goutam Bhaduri, Advocate for the petitioner & Shri AkhU Agrawal, P.L, for fhe State/respondents No. 2 & 3 are heard, 3, Learaed counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order dated 23/8/11 Court below has framed issues relatmg to linutation after amendment in written statement by the present petitioner therefore > 6. present petitioner/defendaiit is entitied to exainiae fhe witaesses adduced on behatf of fhe plamttffs to ttie extent of additional issues framed by fh.e Court relating to limitation. Leanied counsel for flie petitioner produced fhe certtfied copy of fhe order dated 23/8/11 passed by Court below for penisal which shows fhe frammg of additional issues aad fixiag fhe case for evidence of plamtifiFs for 2/9/11. Definitely, after framiag of additional issues/new issues parties have right to adduce fhe evidence of on new issues/additional issues framed by the Court with this observation aad makiag it clear that petitioner is right to adduce his evidence aad cross examiaation the witaesses of opposite parity on new issues/additional issues framed by the Court, petition is staads disposed of, I,A, No. 01 is staads disposed of. No order as to costs, Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge ^