IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA ON THE 21st DAY OF APRIL 2022 BEFORE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA CIVIL MISC. PETITION MAIN (ORIGINAL)

NO. 239 OF 2021 Between:-

GIAN CHAND S/O SHRI POSHU, R/O VILLAGE BHONDA, TEHSIL CHIRGAON, DISTRICT SHIMLA, H.P.

…..PETITIONER (BY SH. SHEETESH KHANNA &

SH. YASH SHARMA, ADVOCATES)

AND

1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH COLLECTOR DISTRICT SHIMLA, SHIMLA-171002.

2. DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT OFFICE AT SHIMLA-171001.

3. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, DEVELOPMENT BLOCK CHHOHARA, TEHSIL CHIRGAON, DISTRICT SHIMLA, H.P..

…..RESPONDENTS (BY SH. SUDHIR BHATNAGAR, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)

_______________________________________________________

This petition coming on for admission this day, the Court passed the following:

O R D E R

Learned trial Court vide impugned order dated

6.9.2021 has allowed an applicatio n moved by the respondents- State under Section 151 of Crode of Civil Procedure permitting it to lead additional evidence by way of tendering into evidence the certified copy of award dated 17.12.1965, Form CC and copy of receipt issued by the then Collector Land Acquisition, Rampur. This order has been taken exception to by the plaintiff in the instant petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the case file.

3. In the petition, gist of some relevant zimni orders passed by the learned trial Court in the civil suit filed by the petitioner has been given. The gist of the zimni orders has not been disputed by the respondents. As per the gist given in the petition:-

Statements of three DWs were recorded by the trial Court on 30.8.2017. The defendants thereafter prayed for time to move an application for leading secondary evidence in the matter. The case thereafter was adjourned on various occasions to enable the defendants to move application for leading secondary evidence. Applic ation under Order 8 Rule 1A (3) CPC was moved by thre defendants on 10.10.2017 for placing on record certified copy of award dated 17.12.1965, Form CC and copy of receipt. This application was allowed by the learned trial Court on 18.1.2018 subject to costs. The matter was adjourned for 15.3.2018. On 15.3.2018, the defendants produced photocopy of the above mentioned documents. Statement of one DW was recorded, whereafter learned counsel for the defendants made a statement for closing the defendants’ evidence. The matter was adjourned for arguments on 3.4.2018. The defendants yet again moved an application under Section 151 CPC for filing copy of Misal Haqiyat for the year 1996. This application was allowed on 5.7.2018 on the ground that the documents were in public domain. The case thereafter was repeatedly fixed for arguments. The arguments in the matter were concluded on

10.8.2020. The matter was fixed for pronouncement of judgment on 2.9.2020.

On 2.9.2020 the defendants moved an application under Section 151 CPC for permission to tender into evidence the certified copy of award dated 17.12.1965, Form CC and copy of receipt. Plaintiff opposed t he application on the ground that it did not disclose suffricient and reasonable ground for production of documents in question. That hearing in the case had already been concluded, therefore, there was no justification for allowing the application for inadvertence of the respondents. Vide order dated 6.9.2021, learned trial Court allowed this application. The respondents-applicants were permitted to tender in evidence the aforesaid documents. Feeling aggrieved, the plaintiff/petitioner has assailed the order dated 6.9.2021.

4. Learned counsel for the plaintiff/petitioner has argued that the defendants had been absolutely careless in pursuing the matter. Their application under Order 8 Rule 1A(3) CPC was allowed by the trial Court on 18.1.2018. The documents in question were allowed to be taken on record. Despite this, the defendants did not produce the certified copies of the documents in qu