THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3992 OF 2013 DATED 11th JULY, 2014 Between:
Potlapally Jayanth Kumar and others.
… Petitioners And Thumukuntla Laxminarayana And another.
… Respondents THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3992 OF 2013 O R D E R The defendants in O.S.No.65 of 2006 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Jangaon, filed I.A.No.56 of 2013 therein under Order 8 Rule 1-A(3) CPC to receive certain documents. By order dated 12.06.2013, the Court below allowed the I.A. in part. While accepting some of the documents sought to be adduced in evidence, the Court below refused to receive one document scribed on a stamp paper worth Re.1/- titled as a sale deed which was dated 07.02.1957. The reason for this refusal was that the said document was in a torn condition and the contents thereof were not decipherable. Aggrieved thereby, the defendants are before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.
By order dated 19.09.2013, this Court granted interim stay of all further proceedings in the suit for a period of four weeks. Though there was no extension of the above order thereafter, it is stated that the Court below is not proceeding with the suit.
As stated supra, the only ground for rejection of the document dated 07.02.1957 was that it was in a torn condition and the contents thereof were illegible. Sri J.Venkateswara Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants, however contends that this finding of the Court below is not correct on facts. A photo copy of the said document is placed on record and reflects that it is in Telugu language in chain script and is capable of being read and understood at least in part. In the event any part of the said document is illegible, the Court below would have to take that part of the said document under advisement. However, the mere physical condition of the document or the status of its contents in terms of legibility cannot ordinarily be a valid ground for shutting out the document at the threshold. The Court below therefore erred in rejecting the document on these grounds.
Subject to the admissibility of the document otherwise, the CRP is allowed. The Court below shall accept the aforestated document in evidence in accordance with law. It shall be open to the respondent/plaintiff to raise all such objections as may be available to him in law in this regard. No order as to costs.
11th JULY, 2014
PGS
------------------------------------- SANJAY KUMAR, J (75) THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3992 OF 2013 DATED 11th JULY, 2014