Darshan Singh, J.

The present revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 13.11.2013 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Tarn Taran, vide which the application moved by the plaintiff-respondent for additional evidence has been allowed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the application moved by the petitioner for additional evidence has been allowed when the suit was pending at the stage of rebuttal evidence. He contended that no application for additional evidence can be allowed at the stage of rebuttal evidence. To support his contentions he has relied upon cases Satnam Singh v. Devinder Kaur 2006 (4) R.C.R (Civil) 639 and Sachin v. Smt. Sunita Vashisht and others, 2005 (2) R.C.R (Civil) 481. He further contended that adequate opportunities were availed by the respondent to adduce the evidence. Thus, he contended that the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court is illegal.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 contended that the petitioner is not being taken by surprise by the additional evidence ought to be adduced. The respondent has already produced on record the certified cop