H. R. KRISHNAN, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application by the defendant in a suit in which at the stage of preparing the judgment, the Civil Judge has suo motu ordered that "the plaintiff would suffer injustice, if certain evidence consisting of preexisting public documents were not brought on record". Accordingly the judgment wag stayed and the plaintiff was permitted to produce them into evidence. Obviously the defendant should get "an opportunity to amend his written statement, recall and cross examine the plaintiffs witnesses in regard to the new material and adduce evidence of his own, to counter what has been permitted to be brought on the record at this stage by the plaintiff. He is going to get this opportunity and in any case it is not his grievance here. The grievance is that at this late stage, the Civil Judge should not, acting suo motu, have permitted this new material to come into the record.

( 2 ) SOME rulings have been cited following the well known principle that parties to litigation-should file their documents and adduce their evidence at the appropriate stage laid down in the Code and should only be allowed to do so at the later stages for good reasons of the kind ment

Click Here to Read the rest of this document