Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWI VEDI, J
Ganesh Narayan Singh, S/o Gauri Shankar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Nageshwar Prasad Mehta, S/o Late Rup Lal Mahto – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos.1 and 3.
2. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order dated 20.03.2024 passed in Title Suit No.141/2016 by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) II-cum-Special Judge L.A. cases, Hazaribagh whereby a leave petition filed by the opposite party No.1 for grant of leave for filing some documents under the provisions of Order 7 Rule 14 of Code of Civil Procedure was rejected. Further prayer is made for quashing of the order dated 29.04.2024 passed in Title Suit No.141 of 2016 by which the amendment petition filed by the opposite party No.1 was allowed.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the learned Court without providing any reason has been pleased to pass the order dated 20th March, 2024 whereby he has allowed the documents to be taken on the record and in view of that he submits that the said order is bad in law. He further submits that the learned Court has allowed the amendment petition filed by the opposite party No.2 which is also not in accordance with law.
4. Learned
Procedural rules must serve justice, allowing document submissions and amendments even with delays, provided they are relevant to the case.
Procedural rules serve justice; hence, a trial court may allow late document submissions to avoid denying justice or causing multiplicity of litigation.
Procedural rules must facilitate, not hinder, justice; courts hold discretion to admit relevant documents even if filed late.
The provisions of Order 8 Rule 1 regarding filing written statements are directory, not mandatory, ensuring fair opportunity for both parties in legal proceedings.
The admissibility of additional evidence in appellate proceedings depends on its necessity for the court to pronounce judgment, not on prior opportunities to present it.
Procedural justice necessitates that minor clerical errors should not prevent parties from presenting relevant evidence, affirming the significance of intent over technicality.
The court upheld the lower court's decision, emphasizing the admissibility of certified documents under the Bankers’ Books Evidence Act and denying that the petitioner was deprived of the opportunity....
The court retains discretion to accept late written statements in exceptional cases, but defendants must provide valid reasons for delays, as emphasized in Article 227 of the Constitution and Order V....
Amendment of plaint – Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell – Proposed amendment which is elaborative in nature, can be allowed.
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
