SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(P&H) 2124

ANIL KSHETARPAL
Zari Bai – Appellant
Versus
Sonia – Respondent


Advocates:
Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

JUDGMENT

Anil Kshetarpal, J.:(Oral) - Plaintiff-petitioner is in the revision petition against the order passed by the learned trial Court dismissing the application under Order 11 Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

2. When the case is for final arguments, plaintiff filed an application praying that the defendant be directed to produce Income Tax Returns and documents relating to the previous litigation.

3. The learned trial Court considered the application and found that parties were alive to the dispute involved in the case and have already led their evidence. The Court has further considered that when the case is at final stage, application cannot be allowed particularly when burden was upon the plaintiff to prove that the defendant had no paying capacity to give sale consideration as alleged.

4. In the considered opinion of this Court, the application filed was not maintainable. Order 11 Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure only enables the Court suo motu to order production of document to any party. Order 11 Rule 14 CPC does not envisage filing of any application at the stage of arguments.

5. In view thereof, there is no scope for interference.

6. Hence, this revision pe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top