Sat Pal, J.

1. This petition has been directed against the order dated 15.9.1997 passed by Additional Civil Judge (SD) Dabwali. By this order the learned Additional Civil Judge has allowed the application filed by the plaintiffs-respondents under Order 18 Rule 17-A CPC for production of additional evidence. Notice of this petition was issued to the respondents.

2. Mr. Gorakh Nath, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has drawn my attention to the order dated 18.12.1996 (copy Annexure P-1) and submits that in terms of the said order, the evidence of the plaintiffs was closed by the learned trial Court. He further submits that the said order dated 18.12.1996 was not challenged by the respondents-plaintiffs and as such the said order has become final. The learned counsel contends that since the learned trial Court has closed the evidence by passing a speaking order which had become final, the application subsequently filed under Order 18 Rule 17-A CPC was not maintainable. In support of his submission the learned counsel has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in Chand Singh v. Narain Singh, 1990(1) L.J.R. 719.

3. Mr. Vikas Kumar, the learned coun