1. Subash Chander, plaintiff, has filed this revision petition questioning Learned Additional District Judge, Reasis Order dated 20th March, 2007, allowing Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Board, Katras application seeking production of documents which could not be inadver-tently placed on records before framing of the issues.

2. Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that `inadvertence, projected as a ground for non-production of documents before the framing of issues would not fall within the expression `good cause occurring in Order 13 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, warranting permission to the respondent-Shrine Board, to produce the documents at the later stage. He thus questions the impugned order placing reliance on Smt. Maya Devi v. Sandeep Khamnotra and others, reported as 1995 SLJ 95.

3. Mr. U.K.Jalali, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Shrine Board, on the other hand, submits that some of the documents were the certified copies of the public records, production whereof could not be objected to under law because authenticity of the originals thereof cannot be doubted. Regarding rest of the documents, learned counsel urged that one of the document

Click Here to Read the rest of this document