Back
MITALI THAKURIA
Varun Beverages Limited – Appellant
Versus
Bakskish Enterprises – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. B. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. P. Roy, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This civil revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the Order dated 06.07.2022, passed by learned Civil Judge No. 1, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, in Money Suit No. 65/2002, whereby, the Petition No. 2851/2019 praying for granting leave for filing the documents was partly rejected, which was filed by the present petitioner/defendant under Order VIII Rule 1-A(3) readwithSection 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner/defendant is a Company registered under Companies Act, 1956, having its registered Office at F-2/7 Okhla Industrial Area, Phase – I, New Delhi, and the respondent/plaintiff No. 1 is a partnership firm, of which the respondent/plaintiff No.2 is the proprietor. The respondent, as a plaintiff, instituted a money suit against the present petitioner/defendant, which was numbered as M.S. No. 65/2002 and pending before the Court of learned Civil Judge, No. 1, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, against M/S North East Pure Drinks Private Ltd., the original defendant No. 1, which
Point of Law : There cannot be any bar to accept the certified copies of the documents which were earlier accepted by the Court even in absence of any leave petition.
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....
Procedural rules should not obstruct substantial justice; reasonable cause for non-disclosure of documents must be interpreted liberally to ensure fair adjudication.
Timely submission of documents and the requirement for sufficient cause to be shown for their delayed filing are crucial principles in civil procedure.
Order XI Rule 1(4) and Order XI Rule 1(5) applicable to the commercial suit shall be applicable only with respect to the documents which were in plaintiff’s power, possession, control or custody and ....
The court established that procedural delays should not prevent the introduction of relevant evidence, prioritizing substantial justice.
Inherent powers under Section 151 CPC may be invoked to admit additional evidence in interlocutory proceedings if the evidence is relevant to the controversy, assists in the ends of justice, and does....
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
