The court upheld the dismissal of a writ petition against a trial court's order, finding no error in refusing to frame additional issues post-evidence completion.

ORDER :

Mr. Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. - This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is preferred against the order dated 14.08.2023 passed by learned Additional District Judge No-10 Jaipur Metropolitan First (Headquarter Sanganer) (for brevity, "the learned trial Court") in Civil Suit No.132/2016 CIS No.98/2020 whereby, an application filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs (for brevity, "the plaintiffs") under Order 14, Rule 5 CPC has been dismissed.

2. The relevant facts in brief are that the plaintiffs filed a suit for cancellation of a deed and permanent injunction wherein, on the basis of pleadings of the respective parties, issues were framed on 13.03.2019. Thereafter, the plaintiffs moved an application dated 28.05.2019 under Order 14, Rule 5 CPC praying therein for framing of four additional issues. The aforesaid application was partly allowed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 19.07.2019 whereby, two of the additional issues proposed by the plaintiffs were framed as issues No.6 and 7. Thereafter, the plaintiffs filed yet another application dated 02.08.2023 under Order 14, Rule 5 CPC for framing of two additional issues which has been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order impugned dated 14.08.2023.

3. None for the plaintiffs to assail the order.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents/defendants supported the findings recorded by the learned trial Court vide order impugned dated 14.08.2023.

5. Heard. Considered.

6. While dismissing the application, the learned trial Court has observed that proposed additional issues were also mentioned in the earlier application filed by the plaintiffs on 28.05.2019 which did not find favour with it. It is further observed that issues proposed were already implicit in the issue No.1 framed on 13.03.2019. This Court is informed by the learned counsel for the respondents that the application came to be filed after evidence of the respective parties was over. After going through the material submitted by the petitioners alongwith the record of writ petition, this Court does not find any perversity or manifest error of law in the order impugned dated 14.08.2023 warranting interference under its limited supervisory jurisdiction.

7. Resultantly, this writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merit with a cost of Rs. 2,000/- which shall be deposited by the plaintiffs with the Litigants Welfare Fund within a period of four weeks from today.