IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNA S. DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO. 53456 OF 2018 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN:
A.S.SRINIVASAN, S/O LATE CONTRACTOR A.SINGA IYENGAR, AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS, AMBUGA VILLAGE, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT—573212, KARNATAKA.
CAMP ADDRESS C/O MR.A.S.MOHAN NO.110/A, “MYTRI ENCLAVE” 6TH MAIN, F.NO.302, NANDAKUMAR LAYOUT, RAMANJANEYA NAGARA.
BENGALURU-560 061. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. A S SRINIVASAN-PARTY-IN-PERSON) AND:
1. AMBUGA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, AMBUGA VILLAGE, SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT—573212, KARNATAKA, REP BY ITS ADHYAKSHA.
2. AMBUGA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, AMBUGA VILLAGE, SHANTHIGRMA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT—573212, KARNATAKA, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, 3. HASSAN TALUK PANCHAYAT, HASSAN-573 201, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT, KARNATAKA, REP BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
4. AMBUGA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, AMBUGA VILLAGE, SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT--573 212, KARNATAKA, REP BY ITS PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MR.MAYAPPA SHETTY.
5. SHRI A.S.BALAKRISHNA, S/O LATE SHYANUBOG A.SAMPATH IYENGAR AMBUGA VILLAGE, SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 212, KARNATAKA EMPLOYED AS (NOW RETIRED) INSPECTOR-CUM-MECHANIC, OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PANCHAYAT RAJ ENGINEERING DIVISION, HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN-573 201 KARNATAKA. ... RESPONDENTS (By SRI. BASANAGOUD, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. YESHU MISHRA & SRI ANOOP HARANAHALLI FOR R5 SRI. A.NAGARAJAPPA & SRI J.N.NAVEEN, ADVOCATES FOR R1 TO 4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD:3.9.2018 ORDERED ON I.A. NO.7 FILED BY THE PLAINTIFF UNDER ORDER 11 RULE 14 R/W SEC.151 OF CPC IN O.S.NO.172/2012 AS CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IS HEREWITH PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-B, AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner being the plaintiff in a possessory suit in O.S. No.172/2012 is knocking at the doors of writ Court for laying a challenge to the order dated 03.09.2018, a copy whereof is at Annexure-B, whereby the learned III Addl. Civil Judge, Hassan, has dismissed his application in I.A. No.7 filed under Order XI Rule 14 read with Section 151 of CPC, 1908, wherein the Gram Panchayat documents were sought to be summoned. The respondents having entered appearance through their counsel, oppose the writ petition.
02. The petitioner in person submits that, he is the absolute owner of the suit property, which he has inherited from the ancestors; the taxes and levies have been paid for the said property since long; there are several public records in the custody of the respondent – local bodies; these documents, despite demand, are not being furnished by the said local bodies, although, the ones that are furnished relate to other properties; these documents are essential for the adjudication of the suit; therefore, the petitioner’s application for summoning of the records of these public bodies ought to have been allowed; this having not been done, there is an error apparent on the face of the record, warranting indulgence of this Court for setting the injustice at naught.
03. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents made submission opposing the writ petition, although no specific ground is pointed out a to why the subject record cannot be ordered to be produced before the trial Court or as to what prejudice would be caused by their production to any of them.
04. Having heard the petitioner – party-in-person and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and having perused the petition papers that run into 533 pages, this Court is inclined to grant relief to the petitioner because:
a. Petitioner’s suit is for possession and prima facie he needs to show that he happens to be the title holder of and right over the subject property; petitioner has been paying the taxes and levies in respect of the subject property; the local bodies have been maintaining the property registers and records in which material particulars of the subject properties such as its number, areal extent, nature, ownership assessment, etc., will be available; the petitioner for his own reason wants the originals of these records to be produced before the Court in as much as the ones the copies whereof are given, do not relate to suit property;
b. what prejudice would be caused to the other side should the records and registers maintained by the public bodies like the official respondents herein are produced before the Court is not forthcoming; the contention that the records are very huge is a feeble justification for not summoning the same by the Court; it is a cardinal principle of adjudication that the litigant should have full opportunity to produce all documents that are in his custody, and caused to be produced other documents that are in the custody of others, of course, subject to all just exceptions into which the case of the petitioner does not fit, and c. the records and registers now sought to be summoned are prima facie constitute a relevant material for the adjudication of the suit; their non-production would materially affect the case of the petitioner.
05. In the above circumstances, this writ petition succeeds; impugned order is set at naught; petitioner’s application in I.A. No.7 filed under Order XI Rule 14 read with Section 151 of CPC, 1908, is favoured; the trial Court shall process the matter further, forthwith.
06. It is needless to mention that the reasonable cost of production including for the transportation and safety of these records and registers shall be borne by the petitioner after being determined by the Court below in contemporary standards.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE SJ