1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by a defendant against the dismissal by the High Court of her Civil Revision. It had arisen out of a decree for possession of the suit house in favour of the plaintiff-respondent passed by the trial Court, which was upheld in appeal. The appellate Court had before dismissing the appeal rejected also the petitioner's application for additional evidence.
2. The controversy between the parties and the dispute brought before the Court in its essential aspects related to the boundaries of two properties and identification of the suit house. On the evidence led before the Court, the respondent's claim was found justified and accordingly the suit had been decreed. Learned counsel frankly stated that if the plea for additional evidence would have been allowed by the appellate Court, the petitioner might have succeeded.
3. We having heard the learned counsel on the question of additional evidence, have not been able to agree with him that the petitioner could have been allowed the concession of additional evidence at the appellate stage under Order XLI, Rule 27 of C.P.C. Otherwise too, after hearing him, we do not find any merit in this petition. Leave to appeal, therefore, is refused.