B. SUBHASHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THIS Revision is filed aggrieved by the order dated 31-7-1999 passed by the Family Court, Secunderabad in I. A. No. 388 of 1999 in O. P. No. 50 of 1996. The husband is the petitioner and the respondent is his wife. The respondent, leading her evidence as R. W. 1, has examined her father as R. W. 2. He was cross-examined by the petitioner and in that process, sought to file letters said to have been written by R. W. 2 to the petitioner and his father, by filing an application under Order XIII Rule 2 of C. P. C. The said application was contested by the respondent alleging that the delay in filing the said documents has not been explained and that the said application has been filed to protract the litigation. The Family Court had accepted the plea of the respondent holding that the delay in filing the letters was not explained and there was no tenable reason to recall R. W. 2 for cross-examination. Hence, this Revision.

( 2 ) ORDER XIII Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure obligates the parties tolitigation to produce all the documentary evidence at or before the settlement of issues. Order XIII Rule 2 comes in aid to the parties to produce the documents at

Click Here to Read the rest of this document