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

1998 Supreme(Raj) 1173

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Bhagwati Prasad, J.
Ram Chandra - Appellant
Versus
Kailash Singh - Respondent
S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 1183/97.
Decided On : 6-08-1998

The application for taking a document on record must be in accordance with the provisions of Order 13 Rule 2, CPC.

Headnote:

Order 13 Rule 2 CPC - Revision Petitions - The trial Court's order allowing the application for taking a document on record was set aside as no sufficient reason was shown. The matter was remanded back to the trial Court for fresh decision in accordance with the provisions of Order 13 Rule 2, CPC.

Fact of the Case:

The trial Court found that the defendants had not shown any good cause for taking the document on record under Order 13 Rule 2 CPC.

Finding of the Court:

The trial Court's order allowing the application was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the trial Court for fresh decision.

Issues: The main issue was whether the trial Court erred in allowing the application for taking the document on record without sufficient reason being shown.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the application may only be allowed if it is in terms of the provisions of Order 13 Rule 2, CPC.

Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the trial Court for deciding the application afresh.

JUDGMENT

1. - By the agreement of the parties, the arguments were finally heard in these revision petitions.

2. These two revision petitions are filed against the order of the trial Court dated 9.1.1997 whereby the trial Court found that the defendants had not been able to show any good cause for taking the document on record, under Order 13 Rule 2 CPC.

3. Once the trial Court had found that no sufficient reason has been shown for taking the document on record then the Court should not have proceeded to pass the impugned order allowing the application. Since trial Court has observed that there are no good reasons for taking the document on record, then it ought not to have allowed the application. The trial Court perhaps was not right in passing this order. Therefore, the order impugned in the revision petition deserves to be set aside.

4. The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the trial Court for deciding the application afresh. The trial Court should examine the matter in the light of the provisions of Order 13 Rule 2 Civil Procedure Code. and the application may only be allowed if it is in terms of the provisions of Order 13 Rule 2, CPC.

5. With these observations, these revision petitions are disposed of and the matter is remanded back to the Trial Court for fresh decision.Petition disposed of.

*******

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 Back to top