Back
GANESH RAM MEENA
Ramesh – Appellant
Versus
Phatteram (Deceased), Safedi – Respondent
ORDER :
Ganesh Ram Meena, J.
The petitioner/ defendant- Ramesh is aggrieved by the order dated 20.12.2018 passed by the Court of learned Addl. Senior Civil Judge No.04, Bharatpur (for short 'the trial court') in O.S. No. 1/2017, dismissing his application filed by him under Order 8, Rule 1A (3) read with section 151 CPC.
2. The facts of the case are that the respondents /plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction against the present petitioner/ defendant-Ramesh and proforma respondents (in this petition) stating that the land in question is a part of Khasra No. 437 which is recorded in their khatedari. However, the said land in question is being used as 'Bada' and the land is situated in abadi area. It was stated in the plaint that the land in question is in their ownership and possession and the defendants have no concern with the land in question. It was further stated in the plaint that the defendants have threatened them to dispossess from the suit property and, therefore, the present suit has been filed by them.
3. On 25.09.2018 petitioner/ defendant- Ramesh and proforma respondents filed an application under Order 8, Rule 1A (3) read with section 151 CPC for taking certain
Point of Law : If procedural violation does not seriously cause prejudice to adversary party, Court must lean towards doing substantial justice.
Procedural rules serve to facilitate justice; allows for late admission of evidence if no prejudice is caused to the opposing party.
The court established that a defendant must produce relevant documents at the time of the written statement and provide valid reasons for any subsequent applications to introduce documents; failure t....
The court affirmed that a party's prior knowledge of documents and repeated attempts to submit them can justify dismissal of applications aimed at delaying proceedings.
Litigants should not suffer due to their counsel’s mistakes, allowing late evidence in exceptional circumstances while stressing the need for expedition in justice.
A litigant ought not to suffer due to a mistake by the defendant's counsel, and the court may allow the placement of additional documents at a belated stage of the proceedings if it deems fit.
Sub-rule(3) of Rule 1A of Order 8 of CPC, provides a second opportunity to defendant to produce documents in Court along with written statement, with leave of court.
Documents not mentioned in the plaint cannot be introduced later without court permission, emphasizing the necessity of timely submission under Order VII Rule 14 CPC.
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
