It has been contended by learned counsel for petitionerdefendant no.1 that when evidence of petitioner-defendant no.1 was closed on 5.2.2010, judgment passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Mohindergarh, dated 2.12.2005, vide which objection petition of respondent no.1 under Order XXI Rule 97 of the Code was dismissed and the judgment dated 10.4.2008 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Narnaul, against the said judgment passed by learned Civil Judge dismissing the appeal of respondent no.1-plaintiff, had not become final as ESA No.12 of 2008 filed by him before this Court was pending and hence, the present petitioner-defendant no.1 could not produce these documents at that time. It is further contended that, however, later on the matter was decided by this Court vide judgment dated 12.3.2010 and the rights of the parties were finally decided as the said ESA No.12 of 2008 filed by respondent no.1plaintiff was dismissed by this Court. It is further contended that the documents now sought to be produced by way of additional evidence are per se admissible in evidence as the same are copies of judgment and
