The court emphasized that the lower court's order for document production must not be a dilatory tactic and should adhere to legal principles governing such applications.

1. The present petition, under Art.226 and Art.227 of the Constitution of India is filed by challenging the impugned order dated 1.7.2022 passed below Exh.60 in Special Civil Suit No.6 of 2020 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Savli, whereby the learned Trial Court has allowed said application under Order XI R.12 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 , (hereinafter referred to as "the CPC.") filed by the respondent herein - original defendant and the petitioner herein - original plaintiff was directed to produce the documents referred to in the application filed below Exh.60 application within 30 days and also is directed to give explanation with regard to the said document with regard to the said documents, if wants.

2 - (2.1) Brief facts of the case are as such that the dispute pertains to land bearing Revenue Survey No.170 paiki 2 admeasuring 5160 Sq. Mts. out of which 3888 Sq. Mts. land, Revenue Survey No.171 Revenue, admeasuring 4148 Sq. Mts. Survey No.172/2 total admeasuring 3844 Sq. Mts. out of which 3056 Sq. Mts. and Revenue Survey No.173 paiki 2 admeasuring 4654 Sq. Mts, out of which 914 Sq. Mrs. land, totally 12006 Sq. Mts. land and on the said lands, plans have been sanctioned for construction of residential Flats known as "The Aukland" (Towers A to B - 136 Flats and 2 Duplex). It is further the case of the petitioner as per the petition that the plaintiff has filed Special Civil Suit No.6 of 2020 for specific performance of the Banakhat dated 7.2.2017 and registered Development Agreement dated 7.12.2017 and declaration of his right and contended that the defendant has executed sale agreement on 7.2.2017 and accordingly, registered development agreement is executed between the parties. However, since the defendant has failed in his duty to act as per the registered development agreement and Banakhat, the plaintiff was constrained to file the suit. It is further the case of the petitioner as per the petition that upon summons being issued by the learned Trial Court, the defendant appeared in the suit proceeding and filed his written statement. Further, during the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff also filed application under Order XXXIX, R.1 and R.2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with S.151 of the CPC. and prayed for interim injunction restraining the defendant not to transfer the suit property in question and after hearing both the parties, the learned Trial Court by order dated 28.9.2020 partly allowed application for injunction and restrained the respondent and his agents as well as servants from transferring the suit property with respect to Towers A and D as mentioned in the said order.
2.2 It is further the case of the petitioner as per the petition that thereafter, the suit proceeded further and the plaintiff has filed his affidavit in lieu of chief - examination and thereafter, the matter was pending for cross - examination of the plaintiff. Further, at the time of cross - examination of the plaintiff, the respondent filed an application Exh.60 under Order XI, R.12 read with S.30 of CPC and contended that there are many documents and details which are in custody and knowledge of the plaintiff and those details and documents are required to be brought on record for adjudication of the dispute between the parties. By the said application, the defendant has prayed to direct the plaintiff to produce following documents : -
A. Bank statement of plaintiff with HDFC Bank limited bearing Account No.50200015153184 for the period from 1.12.2016 to 5.7.2017.
B. Bank statement of plaintiff with HDFC Bank limited bearing Account No.50200015153184 for the period from 12.7.2017 to 30.11.2021.
C. All original agreements with STENZA "DTwelve Spaces Pvt. Ltd" pertaining to properties in suit land.
D. Account statement for the amount received from STENZA "DTwelve Spaces Pvt. Ltd." Pertainin