The present petitioner is the original plaintiff of Regular Civil Suit No. 35 of 1999, which was originally filed before the Court of learned Civil Judge [JD], Santrampur, inter alia, praying for permanent injunction and declaration. The said Regular Civil Suit no. 35 of 1999 came to be transferred to the Court of learned Civil Judge, Fathepur and re-numbered as Regular Civil Suit No. 54 of 2011. The issues in this suit have been framed on 23rd April 2010. Thereafter, deposition of the plaintiff; his examination in chief and cross examination was done by the trial Court.
It could be noted that alongwith the plaint, there are certain documents produced by the plaintiff and subsequent thereto, another list has been produced, copies of which have been given to the otherside.
After deposition of the plaintiff was over, he moved an application before the trial Court. On 4th February 2011 inter alia urging the Court to allow certified copies of these documents which were produced before the Court to be brought on the record. This was objected to by the otherside and the Court after hearing both the sides, rejected such an application.
It is urged before this Court that the Court needs to intervene at this stage under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. It is also further urged that they were already before the Court in photo-state copies, and copies of which were already before the defendants-respondents.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner forcibly submitted that this matter materially jeopardizes the interest of the petitioner and there would be multiplicity of proceedings. As against that, learned advocate appearing for the respondents challenged the same on the ground that though there was ample opportunity for him to produced certified copy and in his application, he has not mentioned the reason why such copies were not produced when his deposition was being recorded.
On having thus heard learned advocates for the respective sides and on having considered the documentary evidence produced before this Court, the fact is not in challenge that certified copies of all those documents which were brought on the record by the plaintiff where already there on the record in a photo state copy and that there are no new documents which were bring brought, after the evidence got over. On closely examining those documents, they appear to be vital for adjudicating the disputes between the parties and they are certified copies; largely of the public documents. Therefore, it cannot be said that after long years there has been any concoction on the part of the petitioner-plaintiff in bringing these documents. Moreover, the stage at which original documents were required to be produced was the stage when the issues were to be framed. However, considering the nature of documents and the fact that the plaintiff is not to enter into the witness box for proving any of these documents - but he is ready to enter the witness box, if the defendant chooses to cross examine him further on this aspect, this permission is required to be given for the reasons recorded hereinabove by setting aside the order impugned and permitting these documents to be brought on the record.
Resultantly, this petition stands disposed of in the above terms, permitting the respondent herein to cross examine the petitioner on any of the aspects with imposition of cost which is quantified at Rs. 5,000/= [rupees five thousand only] in favour of the present respondents.
Direct service is permitted.
{Ms.
Sonia Gokani, J.} Prakash* Top