Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. ABDUL NAZEER, SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.
Sugandhi (dead) by Lrs. & Anr. - Appellants
Versus
P. Rajkumar rep. By His Power Agent Imam Oli - Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 3427 of 2020 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.16491 of 2019)
Decided On : 13-10-2020
(A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order 8 Rule 1A(3) – Production of additional documents – Leave of Court – Discretion conferred upon court to grant such leave is to be exercised judiciously – While there is no strait-jacket formula, this leave can be granted by court on a good cause being shown by defendant – Procedure is handmaid of justice – Procedural and technical hurdles shall not be allowed to come in way of court while doing substantial justice – If procedural violation does not seriously cause prejudice to adversary party, courts must lean towards doing substantial justice rather than relying upon procedural and technical violation – Litigation is nothing but a journey towards truth which is foundation of justice and court is required to take appropriate steps to thrash out underlying truth in every dispute. (Paras 8 and 9)
(B) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order 8 Rule 1A(3) – Production of additional documents – Leave of Court – Suit for injunction alleging that defendants are attempting to grab suit schedule property – Defendants have filed application assigning cogent reasons for not producing documents along with written statement – They have stated that these documents were missing and were only traced at a later stage – It cannot be disputed that these documents are necessary for arriving at a just decision in suit – Courts below ought to have granted leave to produce these documents – Orders impugned herein set aside and application filed by appellants-defendants before Principal Sub-Judge allowed. (Paras 10 and 11)
Facts of the case:
Present appeal is directed against Order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras, Madurai Bench, whereby High Court has dismissed revision petition filed by appellants challenging refusal to entertain an application under Order 8 Rule 1A(3) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking leave of court to produce additional documents.
Findings of Court:
Sub-rule (1) mandates defendant to produce the documents in his possession before the court and file the same along with his written statement. He must list out the documents which are in his possession or power as well as those which are not. In case defendant does not file any document or copy thereof along with his written statement, such a document shall not be allowed to be received in evidence on behalf of the defendant at the hearing of suit. However, this will not apply to a document produced for cross-examination of the plaintiff’s witnesses or handed over to a witness merely to refresh his memory.
Result : Appeal allowed.
Procedure serves as the handmaid of justice, and courts must not permit procedural or technical hurdles to obstruct the delivery of substantial justice. [1000667190008]
Litigation represents a pursuit of truth, which forms the bedrock of justice, requiring courts to adopt measures to uncover the truth in disputes. [1000667190008]
Under Order 8 Rule 1A(3) CPC, a defendant must produce documents relied upon with the written statement; failure to do so bars their admission in evidence without court leave. (!) (!) (!) (!) [1000667190006]
Court leave under Order 8 Rule 1A(3) CPC for additional documents is discretionary, exercised judiciously upon demonstration of good cause by the defendant, without a rigid formula. [1000667190007]
Courts should adopt a lenient approach to applications for producing documents under Order 8 Rule 1A(3) CPC when procedural lapses do not cause serious prejudice to the opposing party, prioritizing substantial justice. [1000667190008]
Documents missing earlier but traced later, if essential for a just decision, warrant court leave for production under Order 8 Rule 1A(3) CPC upon cogent explanation. [1000667190009]
Exceptions to Order 8 Rule 1A CPC include documents used for cross-examining plaintiff's witnesses or refreshing a witness's memory. (!) (!) (!)
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is directed against the Order dated 19.02.2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras, Madurai Bench, in C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)No.2609 of 2018 whereby the High Court has dismissed the revision petition filed by the appellants challenging the refusal to entertain an application under Order 8 Rule 1A(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘C.P.C.’) seeking leave of the court to produce additional documents.
3. The appellants herein are the defendants in the suit, O.S. No.257 of 2014, on the file of the Principal Sub-Judge, Pudukottai, and the respondent is the plaintiff. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to in their respective positions before the Trial Court. The plaintiff filed the suit for injunction alleging that the defendants are attempting to grab the suit schedule property. When the suit was posted for the evidence of the defendants, they filed an application seeking leave to produce certain documents. It was contended that they had recently traced these documents related to the suit property and that was why they could not produce them along with the written statement. This application was opposed by the plaintiff. The Trial Court by its Order dated 11th October, 2018 dismissed the application. As noticed above, the High Court has confirmed the order of the Trial Court.
4. Mr. R. Anand Padmanabhan, learned counsel appearing for the appellants-defendants, submits that the said documents are necessary for just determination of the case. Due to certain unavoidable circumstances, the same could not be produced by the defendants along with the written statement. It was argued that the courts below have rejected the application on flimsy grounds. He submits that no prejudice whatsoever would be caused to the plaintiff by production of these documents.
5. On the other hand, Mr. S. Mahendran, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-plaintiff, has supported the impugned orders of the courts below. It is argued that the defendants are not entitled as a matter of right to produce the documents, particularly when the plaintiff has concluded his evidence.
6. We have given our anxious consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel of the parties.
7. Rule 1A of Order 8 of C.P.C. provides the procedure for production of documents by the defendant which is as under:
(1) Where the defendant bases his defence upon a document or relies upon any document in his possession or power, in support of his defence or claim for set-off or counter-claim, he shall enter such document in a list, and shall produce it in Court when the written statement is presented by him and shall, at the same time, deliver the document and a copy thereof, to be filed with the written statement.
(2) Where any such document is not in the possession or power of the defendant, he shall, wherever possible, state in whose possession or power it is.
(3) A document which ought to be produced in Court by the defendant under this rule, but, is not so produced shall not, without the leave of the Court, be received in evidence on his behalf at the hearing of the suit.
(4) Nothing in this rule shall apply to document—
(a) produced for the cross-examination of the plaintiff’s witnesses, or
(b) handed over to a witness merely to refresh his memory.”
Sub-rule (1) mandates the defendant to produce the documents in his possession before the court and file the same along with his written statement. He must list out the documents which are in his possession or power as well as those which are not. In case the defendant does not file any document or copy thereof along with his written statement, such a document shall not be allowed to be received in evidence on behalf of the defendant at the hearing of the suit. However, this will not apply to a document produced for cross-examination of the plaintiff’s witnesses or handed
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
