SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 3958

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
BIPIN GUPTA
DR. CHETAN SHUKLA S/O SHRI SUSHIL KUMAR SHUKLA – Appellant
Versus
SMT. SUDARSHAN SHARMA W/O LATE SHRI VINOD KUMAR SHARMA – Respondent
CW / 575 / 2024



##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:4156]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 575/2024

Dr. Chetan Shukla, S/o Shri Sushil Kumar Shukla, Aged About 62

Years, R/o House No. 149, Gali No. 1, Janakpuri Mala Road, Kota

(Rajasthan) 324002.

----Petitioner

Versus

1. Smt. Sudarshan Sharma W/o Late Shri Vinod Kumar

Sharma, R/o 1431-A, R.k. Puram, Kota. Successor, Late

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma S/o Late Shri Moolchand Ji

Sharma.

2. Ms. Abhishansha Sharma D/o Late Shri Vinod Kumar

Sharma, R/o 1431-A, R.k. Puram, Kota. Successor Late

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma S/o Late Shri Moolchand Ji

Sharma.

3. Shri Alankar Sharma S/o Late Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma,

R/o 1431-A, R.k. Puram, Kota. Successor Late Shri Vinod

Kumar Sharma S/o Late Shri Moolchand Ji Sharma.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Brij Bhushan Ojha with

Mr. Devanshu Agrawal.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ashwani Chobisa with

Mr. Veerendra Singh

Mr. Priyank Dixit.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA

Order

29/01/2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order

dated 21.12.2023, passed by learned District Judge, Kota, in Civil

Suit No. 119/2019, whereby, the application filed by the plaintiff-

petitioner under Order 7 Rule 14 CPC has been rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that a suit for

recovery of an amount of Rs.16,10,000/-, which was paid as loan

to the defendant-respondent was filed before the learned Civil

Court. During the pendency of the suit, plaintiff filed an application

under Order 11 Rule 12 and 14 CPC for discovery of the bank

(Uploaded on 06/02/2026 at 05:10:31 PM)

(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:52:28 AM)

##PAGE2##

[2026:RJ-JP:4156] (2 of 3) [CW-575/2024]

statement of the defendant’s Bank in which the amount was paid.

However, he submits that the said application was rejected by the

learned trial Court vide order dated 26.07.2023, holding that the

plaintiff can produce his statement of account to show the factum

of payment to the defendant.

3. It is further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner

that thereafter, he obtained the statement of account from his

Bank, which was submitted along with the application filed under

Order 7 Rule 14 CPC before the learned trial Court, which has

been wrongly rejected. He further prays that the documents are

very necessary and relevant for adjudication of the suit.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-defendant

opposes the prayer and contends that the said documents have

been filed at the stage of final hearing of the suit and therefore,

there were no bonafides of the plaintiff to not produce the

documents along with plaint. He thus, supports the order dated

21.12.2023.

5. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on

record.

6. This Court finds that the document are the statement of

Bank which cannot be doubted. Even otherwise the case of the

plaintiff is that by way of certain cheques he has transferred the

amount in the account of the defendant and to show that transfer

he had submitted these statement of accounts. If the defendant

has not received any such amount then there is always right

available with the defendant to disprove this fact by placing his

statement on account before the learned trial Court. This Court is

(Uploaded on 06/02/2026 at 05:10:31 PM)

(Downloaded on 15/02/2026 at 06:52:28 AM)

##PAGE3##

[2026:RJ-JP:4156] (3 of 3) [CW-575/2024]

of the opinion that the documents at this stage ought not to have

been declined by the learned trial Court.

7. Considering the same, the order dated 26.07.2023 is hereby

quashed and set aside and the documents are permitted to taken

on record, subject to payment of Rs.20,000/- to the defendant-

respondent. It is further made clear that the defendant-

respondent will be entitled to place the evidence in rebuttal, if the

plaintiff produces any evidence in support of these documents.

8. With the above observation, the present writ petition stands

disposed of.

9. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

(BIPIN GUPTA),J

Jubin /40

(Uploaded on 06/02/2026 a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top