SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(AP) 809

B.CHANDRA KUMAR
Pavuluru Mohan Rao – Appellant
Versus
Gudipati Krishnamma – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:M.P. Chandramouli, Advocate.
For the Respondents:P. Ganga Rami Reddy, Advocate.

Judgement Key Points

The legal document pertains to a civil revision petition concerning the production and filing of documents under the Civil Procedure Code, specifically Order VII Rule 14(3). The petitioner, who is the plaintiff in the original suit, sought to condone the delay in filing certain documents (copies of Adangals) that were relevant to his case. The court examined whether the lower court was justified in dismissing this application.

The key issue was whether the plaintiff had a reasonable cause for not submitting the documents at the appropriate time. The court noted that the plaintiff had obtained copies of the relevant documents prior to filing the suit but failed to produce them immediately, citing misplacement as the reason. However, the court found this reason unconvincing, emphasizing that these documents are public records and that the plaintiff could have obtained duplicates from the relevant authorities.

The court reiterated that, under the applicable rules, the plaintiff is required to list and produce such documents at the time of filing the plaint unless there is a justifiable reason for delay, which must be accepted at the court's discretion and exercised judiciously. Since the plaintiff did not provide a sufficient reason for the delay, and the documents were readily obtainable, the court upheld the lower court's decision to dismiss the application for condonation.

Ultimately, the court dismissed the revision petition, affirming that the lower court's order was justified and that the plaintiff could still rely on other provisions of the law for utilizing the documents at a later stage. The interim orders were also vacated accordingly.


Judgment :

1. The Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff questioning the order dated 09.06.2010 passed by the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Gudur in I.A.No.160/2010 in O.S.No.434/2010, vide which, the learned Judge dismissed the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Order VII Rule-14(3) CPC seeking to condone the delay in filing the documents.

2. Heard both sides

3. The petitioner herein is the plaintiff. He obtained copy of the Adangal for fasali 1414 (2004) on 21.02.2005. He filed the suit on 04.11.2005. His case is that when he wanted to file copy of adangal for fasali 1414 (2004), his counsel advised him to file the said adangal along with the adangal for fasali 1415 (2005). According to him, he got the copy of Adangal of 1415 on 28.11.2005 i.e. subsequent to filing of the suit. According to him, by the time the injunction petition in I.A.No.1361/2005 came up for hearing. His further case is that copies of two Adangals could not be traced as they were misplaced while shifting his residence from Narasingaraopet to Dhurjati Nagar in the beginning of 2006.

4. The Court below dismissed the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff on
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top