Summoning public officers under Order XVI, Rule 1 of CPC cannot be invoked by private parties without adducing proper and relevant evidence to prove their case.

ORDER :

This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article - 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order dated 02.03.2022 passed in I.A. No.31 of 2022 in O.S. No.34 of 2012 by the learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Adilabad.

2. Heard Mr. Sharad Sanghi, learned counsel for the petitioner - defendant No.1 and Mr. S. Chandra Sekhar, learned counsel for respondent No.1 - plaintiff.

3. FACTS:

i) Respondent No.1 herein had filed a suit, vide O.S. No.34 of 2012 on the file of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Adilabad, against the petitioner herein - defendant No.1 and respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein - defendant Nos.2 and 3 for declaration to declare him as adoptive son of late Thota Pothanna and Thota Rukma Bai; to declare him as owner of the suit schedule properties viz., Survey No.6/F, measuring Acs.7.13 guntas; Sy.No.13/G, measuring Acs.2.00 guntas and Sy.No.14/D, measuring Acs.1.38 guntas and House No.2-73, situated at Bhoraj Village, Jainath Mandal, Adilabad District; cancellation of ex parte decree dated 24.03.2011 passed in O.S. No.93 of 2010 and the consequential order dated 28.04.2011 passed by defendant No.3; and for perpetual injunction.

ii) In the said suit, the evidence of the plaintiff was closed and the petitioner herein - defendant No.1 had examined three (03) witnesses. The said suit is coming up for arguments. At that stage, the petitioner herein - defendant No.1 had filed an application vide I.A. No.31 of 2022 in O.S.No.34 of 2012 under Order - XVI , Rules - 1 and 5 read with 151 of the CPC to issue summons to the Tahsildar, Tamsi, with a direction to bring the original 1B ROR Namuna Certificate, Pahanies pertaining to Survey Nos.105/A, 105/AA and 105/AA/1 and to submit National Food Security Cards Ration Card No.365320009924, FSC Ref.No.ALD523072465039 stands in the names of respondent No.1 herein and Thota Lasum Bai, and to give evidence, on the following grounds:

a) Respondent No.1 herein - plaintiff is not the adopted son, nor residing at Bhoraj Village. He is the resident of Tamsi Village having lands in Survey Nos.105/A, 105/AA and 105/AA/1 and also Voting Right;

b) To prove the same, summoning of the aforesaid documents and giving evidence by Tahsildar, Tamsi Mandal are relevant;

c) Ration Card pertaining to respondent No.1 herein is also relevant; and

d) He has filed a petition under Right to Information Act (for short ‘RTI’) before the Tahsildar, Tamsi Mandal on 10.02.2022 seeking the aforesaid information, but the same was not furnished to him;

iii) Respondent No.1 herein - plaintiff opposed the above said petition on the following grounds:

a) The petitioner herein has filed a similar petition on 30.11.2021 which was returned by the Court below on the ground of non-compliance of the mandatory requirements of Rule - 129 of the Civil Rules of Practice (for short ‘CRP’);

b) Even now, the petitioner herein had not complied with the said conditions;

c) The plaintiff’s evidence was closed on 05.03.2020.

d) The petitioner herein filed his affidavit in lieu of chief-examination on 24.03.2021 and the same was closed on 24.11.2021;

e) Thereafter, the petitioner herein had filed a petition on 30.11.2021 and the same was withdrawn by him;

f) Thereafter, DW.2 filed his affidavit in lieu of chief-examination on 21.12.2021 and he was present for cross-examination on 06.01.2022;

g) At that stage, the petitioner herein had filed I.A. No.31 of 2022 on 21.02.2022;

h) The petitioner herein has not mentioned satisfactory reasons;

i) The documents sought to be summoned/produced from the Tahsildar, Tamsi Mandal do not pertain to the suit schedule properties;

j) The natural parents of respondent No.1 herein own a house and properties etc., at Tamsi Village and he has elder brother;

k) After adoption, respondent No.1 herein has been staying at Bhoraj Village as adopted son of Thota Potanna and Rukma Bai;

l) The petitioner herein is also claiming that he is adopted son of the aforesaid persons i.e., Thota Potan