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

2008 Supreme(Raj) 1797

VINEET KOTHARI
Paras Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Bhag Chand – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioners:Arun Bhansali, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Vinay Jain, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This petition is directed against the order dated 16.2.2006 (Annexure-7) passed by the trial Court allowing the application of the plaintiff under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) C.P.C. taking on record certain documents.

3. This is challenged by the defendant, the present petitioner on the ground that earlier a similar application was rejected by the trial Court on 10.1.2006 and again when such application was filed vide Annexure-5, the same came to be allowed by the same Presiding Officer of the trial Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Bhansali submits that these documents could not have been taken on record as earlier such application was already rejected by the learned trial Court.

5. This submission is opposed by Mr. Vinay Jain, learned counsel for the plaintiff respondent. He submits that earlier only photo copies of the documents were produced, the learned trial Court rejected the said application but later on when the plaintiff was able to obtain certified copies of the said documents, most of which are public documents, the learned trial Court has allowed the same by recourse to Order 7 Rule 14 (3) CPC, which cannot be




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