Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Arshad Ali – Appellant
Versus
Anil Mandal @ Gorain son of Late Thako Mandalain and Late Joggeshwar @ Gagan Mandal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing of related cases together (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. filing petitions under article 227 (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments for document admission (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. concern over injustice in document rejection (Para 8) |
| 5. court's emphasis on justice over procedural strictness (Para 9) |
| 6. orders allowing document admission (Para 10 , 11) |
| 7. conclusion and disposal of petitions (Para 12) |
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Opposite parties in both the cases.
2. Both these cases are arising out of the same suit and in view of that both the cases are heard together.
3. C.M.P. No. 949 of 2024 has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 07.08.2024 passed by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division Bench-II, Jamtara, whereby the petition filed under Order VIII Rule 1A(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure in Original Suit No. 01/2018 was rejected by the learned court concerned.
4. C.M.P No. 82 of 2025 has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 22.06.2024 passed by learned Civil Judge, Senior Divisio
Preventing document submission due to delay constitutes injustice; courts should allow evidence while imposing costs for late filings instead of rejecting submissions outright.
Procedural rules must facilitate, not hinder, justice; courts hold discretion to admit relevant documents even if filed late.
The Court's decision emphasized that the documents sought to be placed on record were already referred to in the plaint, and the defendants had sufficient opportunity to deal with them, justifying th....
Order 8 Rule 1(3) CPC requires due diligence and relevance for post-written statement documents; unexplained delay, pre-existence of some, and irrelevance to suit dispute warrant dismissal; no Articl....
Matters of procedure should not hinder the dispensation of justice, and the relevance of documents for just and fair adjudication should be considered when deciding on applications to bring documents....
Procedural delays should not impede justice; courts may allow document submissions if relevant for fair adjudication.
Procedural rules serve justice; hence, a trial court may allow late document submissions to avoid denying justice or causing multiplicity of litigation.
While exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Court is not sitting as an appellate court over the orders passed by the subordinate courts.
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
