Timely production of documents and limitations on filing documents after the completion of pleadings are crucial in civil procedure.

YOGESH KHANNA, J.

O.A. No.76/2018

1. This chamber appeal is against an Order dated 05.07.2018 passed by the learned Joint Registrar wherein he has allowed the respondent’s application I.A.No.2180/2018 seeking permission to bring on record additional documents despite the plaintiff evidence being underway and two witnesses having been cross-examined. The additional documents were allowed to be brought on record by the Joint Registrar despite having filed after framing of issues and the commencement of the trial. It is alleged earlier too the plaintiff has been granted an opportunity to file additional documents vide an order dated 10.11.2017, but it failed to bring these documents at such time, hence the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

2. Certain dates are relevant for the purpose. On 14.09.2017 the issues in this case were framed. On 13.09.2017 I.A. No.11385 of 2017 was filed by the plaintiff to bring on record the additional documents (other than the documents in dispute). Such application was allowed on 10.11.2017.

3. On 07.11.2017 issues were amended. However on 02.12.2017, 05.12.1017 and 12.01.2018 three sets of documents were filed by the plaintiff. Later on, on 13.01.2018 the plaintiff moved an application I.A.No.2180/2018 to formally bring these three sets of documents on record. The impugned order was passed by the Joint Registrar on 05.07.2018 on the premise the trial has not yet commenced.

4. The question now is if these documents were in the plaintiff’s possession prior to the date of framing of issues and/or before the date of filing of the suit and if those were, then can such documents be allowed to be placed on record at this stage.

5. The reason for filing the documents after framing of issues is mentioned in para 4 of I.A.No.2180/2018 as under:

“The said documents were not in power, possession, control or custody of the plaintiff earlier and are very recent in nature”.

6. Thus, the plaintiff alleges a) the documents were not in power, possession and control or custody of the plaintiff earlier; and b) are very recent in nature.

7. However, a bare perusal of the documents would show barring a judgment passed by Ecuador Court on 31.10.2017; all other documents are dated either prior to framing of issues or prior to the filing of the suit, hence, documents being of the plaintiff itself, it cannot say the same were never in its power, possession or custody and it is also false to allege such documents were recent in nature except a decision of Ecuador Court dated 31.10.2017.

8. Order VII Rule-14(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 reads as under:-

“14 Production of document on which plaintiff sues or relies—

(1) xxx

(2) xxx

(3) A document which ought to be produced in Court by the plaintiff when the plaint is presented, or to be entered in the list to be added or annexed to the plaint but is not produced or entered accordingly, shall not, without the leave of the Court, be received in evidence on his behalf at the hearing of the suit.

(4) xxx

9. Further, Order XI Rule-1(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 reads as under:

“1. Disclosure and discovery of documents.—(1) Plaintiff shall file a list of all documents and photocopies of all documents, in its power, possession, control or custody, pertaining to the suit, along with the plaint, including:—

(a) documents referred to and relied on by the plaintiff in the plaint;

(b) documents relating to any matter in question in the proceedings, in the power, possession, control or custody of the plaintiff, as on the date of filing the plaint, irrespective of whether the same is in support of or adverse to the plaintiff’s case;

(c) nothing in this Rule shall apply to documents produced by plaintiffs and relevant only–– (i) for the cross-examination of the defendant’s witnesses, or (ii) in answer to any case set up by the defendant subsequent to the filing of the plaint, or (iii) handed over to a witness merely to refresh his memory.”

10. Further, Chapter 7 Rule-14 of