The court allows the plaintiff to disclose additional documents based on reasonable cause for non-disclosure, emphasizing that such discretion may be exercised even after initial pleadings in undefended suits.

JUDGMENT :

ANIRUDDHA ROY, J. 

1. This is a commercial suit. The defendant has not filed its written statement. The defendant has forfeited its right to file written statement under the amended provisions of Rule 1 to Order VIII of CPC, 1908.

2. Examination-in-chief of the plaintiff’s witness has been concluded. Though the suit has been marked as undefended but the defendant did not choose to cross-examine the witness of the plaintiff. In this regard, reliance has been placed on an order dated February 25, 2025 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench.

3. Today, the plaintiff has come up with an application with the following prayers:

“(a) Leave be granted to the petitioner to disclose the documents annexed as "C-1" to "F" of the instant application;

(b) Leave be granted to the petitioner to prepare Additional Judges Brief of Documents containing the documents annexed as "C-1" to "F" of the instant application and file the same within four weeks from the date of the order to be made herein, or within such time as to this Hon'ble Court may seem fit and proper;

(c) Leave be granted to the petitioner to file Affidavit of Evidence of its second witness, Mr. Gautam Das, within six weeks from the date of the order to be made herein, or within such time as to this Hon'ble Court may seem fit and proper and leave be granted to the petitioner to adduce oral evidence through the said second witness Mr. Gautam Das;

(d) Costs of and incidental to this application be treated as costs in the cause;

(e) Such further or other order or orders be passed and/or direction or directions be given as to which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.”

4. Though the defendant is represented through Mr. Arani Guha, learned advocate but since the suit is marked as undefended, the defendant has no right of audience in this application.

SUBMISSIONS:

5. Mr. Rajarshi Dutta being ably assisted by Mr. Sarbesh Choudhury, learned Advocate appearing for the plaintiff submits that though the relevant documents at all material time was under the custody, power, possession and control of the plaintiff at the time of institution of the suit but the same were not disclosed by the plaintiff. However, during the examination of the witness and at the stage of argument of the suit, it was felt by the plaintiff that those documents are essentially to be disclosed to sustain the claim in the plaint and hence, this application has been filed.

6. Referring to Sub-Rule 1 to Sub-Rule 3 to Rule 1 of Order XI of CPC, Mr. Rajarshi Dutta, learned Advocate appearing for the plaintiff submits that, these provisions provide that the plaintiff is duty bound while instituting the suit to disclose documents in the manner and mode prescribed therein, which were in its power, possession, control and custody. It is a mandatory obligation on the part of the plaintiff. With reference to Sub-Rule 4 to Rule 1 of Order XI of CPC, it is submitted that in case of urgent filings, the plaintiff may seek leave to rely on additional documents, as part of the declaration on oath and subject to grant of such leave by Court, the plaintiff shall file such additional documents in Court, within 30 days of filing the suit, along with a declaration on oath that the plaintiff has produced all documents in its power, possession, control or custody, pertaining to the facts and circumstances of the proceedings initiated by the plaintiff and that the plaintiff does not have any other documents, in its power, possession, control or custody. Therefore, under Sub-Rule 4, an opportunity has been granted to the plaintiff to disclose additional documents in case of urgent filing of the suit.

7. Referring to the above provis