The petitioners/plaintiffs filed an application before the learned Civil Judge I-Class, Sheikhupura for seeking permission for production of additional evidence. This application was dismissed vide order, dated 7-10-1999. The revision petition filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs. Also met with the same fate and was dismissed vide judgment, dated 2-2-2000. Hence this writ petition.
2. The suit for declaration was filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs in the year 1981 and the application for production of additional evidence was filed when the case was fixed for final arguments. The case remained pending for full 19 years and the parties adduced their evidence which was closed and at the stage when the case was fixed for arguments, in order to further delay the matter, this application was filed. Both the Courts below were justified in refusing this application.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has failed to point out any illegality or infirmity in the orders of Courts below and the concurrent finding recorded by the Courts below is just and correct.
Otherwise too the rule laid down in Muhammad Khan and 6 others v. Mst. Ghulam Fatima and 12 others 1991 SCM R 970, this writ petition is not maintainable.
4. For the reasons abovementioned, this writ petition has no merit and the same is dismissed. No order as to costs. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.