Back
M. S. SONAK
Jorge Menezes Souza – Appellant
Versus
Maximo J R De Souza – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr G. Agni learned counsel for the Petitioners, and Mr Y. D'Souza learned counsel for the Respondents (contesting partiesoriginal plaintiffs ).
2. Rule. The rule is made returnable immediately at the request and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
3. The challenge in this petition is to the order dtd. 21/1/2020 and order dtd. 16/11/2021 refusing to review the order dtd. 21/1/2020. Technically, this Court need not have entertained the petition against the second order. However, if the first order is set aside, the second order falls.
4. The impugned orders permit the original plaintiffs to produce on record the following documents after commencing the trial.
(a) Copy of Survey Plan dtd. 8/8/2018 of Survey No.367 situated in Village Velsao.
(b) 2 Photographs of ancestral house well taken on 8/8/2018.
(c) 1 Photograph taken in the year 1983.
(d) 1 Photograph taken on 22/12/2012.
(e) 1 Photograph of ancestral house well taken on 14/8/2018.
(f) 1 Photograph of ancestral house well taken on 15/8/2018
(g) 1 Photograph of ancestral house well taken on 17/8/2018.
(h) Certified copy of terms of Compromise Order dated 07041993 in I.P. 051989.
(i) Notarise
Courts can entertain a petition against a subsequent order if setting aside the first order would render the subsequent order invalid. Courts may interfere with orders permitting the production of do....
The second opportunity to produce documents under Order VIII Rule 1A(3) is for those who have produced documents with the written statement and have accountable reasons for not producing certain docu....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court may not permit the filing of additional documents at a belated stage if it would only protract the case, as established by the princ....
Production of documents – Every party should get opportunity to lead his best evidence – Relevance of documents could be examined by trial court.
The duty of the defendant to produce relevant documents in court and the importance of fair trial procedures.
Court must direct production of documents when party admits possession during cross-examination.
The court ruled that secondary evidence can be admissible under the CPC when original documents are unavailable, and trial courts must provide cogent reasoning for rejecting such applications.
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
