The trial court may allow the admission of relevant documents during a fresh trial following a remand, independent of their earlier introduction in prior proceedings, subject to proof and admissibility.

ORDER :

G. RADHA RANI, J.

This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner - defendant aggrieved by the docket order dated 17.08.2021 passed in I.A.No.1217 of 2021 in O.S.No.164 of 2006 by the learned Junior Civil Judge, Huzurabad in allowing the petition filed by the plaintiff for receiving certain documents.

2. The respondent filed the suit O.S.No.164 of 2006 seeking the relief of permanent injunction against the petitioner - defendant herein before the Junior Civil Judge at Huzurabad. The said suit was dismissed by the trial court on 16.02.2013. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the respondent - plaintiff preferred A.S.No.8 of 2013. The said appeal was heard by the learned Senior Civil Judge at Huzurabad and vide judgment dated 01.02.2019 allowed the appeal setting aside the order of the trial court and remanded the matter back for fresh trial within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of records. After the matter was remanded, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.1217 of 2021 under Section 151 of CPC to receive certain documents i.e. certified copies of pahanies for the years 2005-2011, No Due Certificate given by the Co-perative Society, Elkathurthy dated 11.08.2006, certified copy of FIR, certified copy of complaint, certified copy of charge sheet, certified copy of the statements of LWs.1 to 4, the true copy of the statement of the plaintiff, the certified copy of the letter issued by the Co-operative Executive Officer, Elkathurthy, certified copy of memo issued by the Naib Tahsildar, Elkathurthy.

3. The plaintiff filed an affidavit along with the said petition stating that he filed the above documents before the Lower Appellate Court i.e. the Senior Civil Judge Court at Huzurabad itself. All the said documents were public documents, which were relevant to prove his claim. The suit was posted for the evidence of the official witnesses i.e. the Tahsildar, Elkathurthy and the Co- operative Executive Officer, Elkathurthy, as per the direction of the Lower Appellate Court, as such prayed to receive and mark the same as exhibits in the case.

4. The defendant filed counter in the said I.A. contending that the said documents were not filed during the course of trial. They were brought into existence for the first time in the appeal by way of filing I.A.No.445 of 2013 under Order XLI Rule 27 of CPC. After due enquiry, the Lower Appellate Court dismissed the petition, on which the petitioner preferred C.R.P.No.3208 of 2015. The High Court directed the Lower Appellate Court to hear and decide I.A.No.445 of 2013 along with the main appeal and to pass orders in accordance with law. The Lower Appellate Court remanded the suit to the Court for fresh trial with a direction to examine the Tahsildar, Elkathurthy in respect of the issue of pahani for the year 2004-05 and also the authorities of LSCS, Elkathurthy to ascertain whether the respondent - defendant deposited the remaining sale consideration in the name of his son with the society. As per the directions of the Appellate Court, the Court issued summons to the Tahsildar, Elkathurthy and Manager, LSCS, Elkathurthy. The suit was remanded to the Court with a limited power to examine the above witnesses. The petitioner had no right to mark the documents as exhibits, which were not allowed by the Appellate Court and sought for dismissal of the petition.