The court clarified that the trial court's wording indicated acceptance of applications to submit documents, ensuring the petitioner's rights were maintained.

DEEPAK GUPTA , J.(Oral)

CM-21875-CII-2025 This is an applica(cid:23)on under Sec(cid:23)on 151 CPC to place on record the table giving detail of dates and events in chronological order as Annexure A-1 and also to place on record the orders passed by the trial Court as Annexure A-2.

Allowed.

Annexures A-1 and A-2 are taken on record.

CR-5755-2025 Pe(cid:23)(cid:23)oner herein is the plain(cid:23)ff before leaned Civil Judge (Jr.

Divn.), Faridkot in a civil suit bearing No.CS-665-2021, (cid:23)tled as “Shamsher Singh Brar v. Gurpree(cid:19)nder Singh Brar and others”. He is aggrieved by the order dated 30.07.2019 (Annexure P-19), whereby as many as four applica(cid:23)ons were disposed of.

2. A3er hearing learned counsel for the pe(cid:23)(cid:23)oner, it has emerged that the main grievance of the pe(cid:23)(cid:23)oner is only to the extent that the Court has not clarified about the fate of two of the applica(cid:23)ons as disposed of.

3. The first grievance as put forth by learned counsel for the pe(cid:23)(cid:23)oner-plain(cid:23)ff is that the applica(cid:23)ons dated 17.07.2024 and 29.08.2024 were moved by the plain(cid:23)ff-pe(cid:23)(cid:23)oner to place on record certain vital documents and also seeking (cid:23)me to place on record rest of documents. The opposite counsel made statement of his no objec(cid:23)on and the Court accordingly disposed of the two applica(cid:23)ons dated 17.07.2024 and

29.08.2024.

4. Learned counsel for the pe(cid:23)(cid:23)oner submits that the words used by the Court are ‘disposed of’, without clarifying as to whether the applica(cid:23)ons have been allowed or not and the pe(cid:23)(cid:23)oner apprehends that the documents which are referred in the aforesaid two applica(cid:23)ons dated 17.07.2024 and 29.08.2024 may not be taken into considera(cid:23)on by the Court at the (cid:23)me of disposing of the applica(cid:23)on under Order 39 Rules 1 and

2 CPC.

5. There appears to be no merit in the aforesaid conten(cid:23)on because the tone and tenor of the order would make it quiet clear that the trial Court has accepted the applica(cid:23)ons dated 17.07.2024 and 29.08.2024, permi>ng the pe(cid:23)(cid:23)oner-plain(cid:23)ff to place on record documents in ques(cid:23)on. Order dated 30.07.2025 (Annexure P-19) is modified accordingly.

6. The next grievance put forth by learned counsel for the pe(cid:23)(cid:23)oner is that defendant Nos.1 and 2 have been allowed to file the wri?en statement without prejudice to their rights in respect of an applica(cid:23)on filed under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, to be disposed of on merits. To that extent, learned counsel has no grievance. His grievance is that defendants have been given liberty to file fresh wri?en statement in case plain(cid:23)ff gives be?er par(cid:23)culars subsequently. Learned counsel submits that without clarifying as to in what circumstances, the defendants were allowed to file the amended wri?en statement, the order becomes vague.

7. A3er hearing learned counsel for the pe(cid:23)(cid:23)oner, the impugned order dated 30.07.2025 (Annexure P-19) is hereby modified by holding that the trial Court shall pass reasoned order for permi>ng defendant Nos.1 and 2 to file the amended wri?en statement, in case necessity arises a3er filing of any addi(cid:23)onal documents by the plain(cid:23)ff, if the Court permits the plain(cid:23)ff to do so.

8. With the aforesaid modifica(cid:23)on in the impugned order dated