Translated versions of previously exhibited documents may be admitted without filing an application under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC, as they are not considered 'additional evidence' but necessary for justice.

JUDGMENT :

Ajay Mohan Goel, J.

By way of this petition, the petitioners have assailed order dated 21.02.2023, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, in CMA No. 75/2022, titled Roop Lal & anr. Vs. Rishib Kumar & anr., in terms whereof, the application filed under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’), for providing an opportunity to prove the Hindi version of Ex.P2, Ex.P3, Ex.P4 and Ex.P15,was dismissed.

2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners argued that in this case, the above mentioned four documents were exhibited before the learned Trial Court, by the plaintiff. The documents were in Urdu. Hindi translation of the said documents was also filed before the learned Trial Court and these translations are marked documents but they could not be exhibited for want of the examination of the person who translated them on account of his death. In these circumstances, learned Senior Counsel submitted that application was filed before the learned Appellate Court with the prayer that the translated documents be taken on record and an opportunity be granted to the applicants/plaintiffs to prove the Hindi version of these documents through duly authorized Translator by recording his evidence to this effect and justice be done. He submitted that the dismissal of the said application by the learned Appellate Court is completely unjustified in law. He drew the attention of the Court to the impugned order and submitted that the learned Appellate Court misdirected itself and construed as if the prayer of the applicants was to lead additional evidence, which is also evident from the contents of the last paragraph of the of the impugned order. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that as in this backdrop, the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law, the same be set aside and the prayer, as made in the application before the learned Appellate Court be allowed.

3. On the other hand, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent submitted that as the documents in Urdu were filed before the learned Trial Court, there was ample time with the plaintiffs to have had proved the Hindi translation thereof before the learned Trial Court, which admittedly was not done. He further submitted that though it is pleaded on behalf of the applicant that the gentleman who translated the Urdu documents was no more but nothing was placed on record to demonstrate whether he died after the evidence of the plaintiffs or before that. He further submitted that the suit of the plaintiffs was dismissed by the learned Trial Court. Before the learned Trial Court, no such application was filed by the applicants and the same was preferred only at the time of filing of the Appeal and the intent behind was nothing but to fill up the lacuna. Accordingly, he submitted that in this backdrop, as there is nothing wrong in the impugned order, the present petition be dismissed.

4. I have learned Senior Counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the impugned order as well as other documents appended with the writ petition.

5. The backdrop, in which the impugned order was passed, has been mentioned by me hereinabove. There is no dispute qua the facts that have been narrated by me hereinabove. The reasoning which has been given by the learned Appellate Court while dismissing the application filed by the present petitioners before it, is as under:-

“I have heard id. counsel for the parties and have also perused the case file with minute care.

The power under Section 151 CPC will have to be used with circumspection and care, only where it is absolutely necessary, when there is no provision in the code governing the matter, when the bonafides of the applicants cannot be doubted, when such exercise is to meet the ends of justice and to prevent abuse of process of court. The power under Section 151 or Order 18 Rule 17 of CPC is not intending to be used routinely, merely for the asking. If so used, it wil