Honble SINGH, J.– Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2). This revision petition is directed against the order dated 7.5.1999 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1, Pali in civil original suit No. 103/93.

(3). By the impugned order, the learned Civil Judge allowed the plaintiff to produce a receipt book for the purpose of cross- examination during the examination of Jetha Ram DW-1.

(4). A perusal of the order dated 7.5.1999 shows that during the examination of Jetha Ram DW-1(defendant), the plaintiff produced the receipt book for the purpose of cross-examination of Jetha Ram. An objection was raised on behalf of the defendant- petitioner that the plaintiff did not produce the receipt-book earlier in spite of the same being in his possession and, therefore, the plaintiff should not be permitted to produce the receipt book in court for the purpose of cross-examination of the defendant Jetha Ram. The argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner (defendant) was based on the provisions contained in Order 7, Rule 18 C.P.C. Order 7 Rule 14 was also referred to the learned Civil Judge who after hearing the parties over-ruled the objections raised by the petitioner (defendant) in view of the provisions contained in Order 7 Rule 18(2) C.P.C. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 7.5.1999, the petitioner approached this court u/S. 115 C.P.C. by filing the revision petition.

(5). So far as the production of documentary evidence is concerned, Order 7 Rule 14 C.P.C. provides that where a plaintiff sues upon a document in his possession or power, he shall produce it in court when the plaint is presented, and shall at the same time deliver the document or a copy thereof to be filed with the plaint. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 14 of Order 7 C.P.C. provides that where he relies on any other documents (whether in his possession or power or not) as evidence in support of his claim, he shall enter such documents in a list to be added or annexed to the plaint. A bare reading of Rule 14 of Order 7 C.P.C. shows that Sub-rule (1) of Rule 14 of Order 7 C.P.C. does not apply to those documents which are not in possession or power of the plaintiff or the documents which are not the basis of the suit. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 14 C.P.C. deals with any other documents whether in possession and power or not, on which the plaintiff realise as evidence in support of his claim. This Sub- rule does not cover those documents which are not relied upon by the plaintiff for the purpose of supporting his claim.

Rule 18 of Order 7 C.P.C. Reads:-

``8. Inadmissibility of document not produced when plaint filed- (1) 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, and which 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.

(2). Nothing in this rule applies to documents produced for cross-examination of the defendants witnesses, or in answer to any case set up by the defendant or handed to a witness merely to refresh his memory.

(6). The provisions of Rule 18 of Order 7 C.P.C., necessarily referred to the documents mentioned in Rule 14 of Order 7 C.P.C. The prohibition imposed by Rule 18 on the production of the documents is, therefore, applicable to only those documents which are required to be filed by the plaintiff under sub-rule(1) of Rule 14 of Order 7 C.P.C. or the list whereof is required to be filed under Rule 14 (2) of Order 7 C.P.C. by the Plaintiff. The documents which may be produced by the plaintiff for the purpose of impeaching the testimony of any witness (including the opposite party) or for the purpose of answering to any case set up by the defendant or the documents which intended to be used only for refreshing the memory of the witnesses do not appear to be covered by Rule 14 of Order 7 C.P.C. I, therefore, ha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document