THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.3166 & 3175 OF 2023

COMMON ORDER

Heard Sri Y.Sree Raghava Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner-defendant. Despite service of notice, there is no representation on behalf of the respondent-plaintiff.

02. Lis involved in these Civil Revision Petitions and parties are common. Therefore, both these Civil Revision Petitions are being heard and disposed of by way of this Common Order.

03. These Civil Revision Petitions are filed by the petitioner-defendant aggrieved by the impugned Orders dated 20.07.2023 passed in I.A.No.140 of 2023 and I.A.No.141 of 2023 in O.S.No.197 of 2022 (old O.S.No.257 of 2016) by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Warangal.

04. Respondent-plaintiff had filed a suit in O.S.No.197 of 2022 (old O.S.No.257 of 2016) seeking recovery of an amount of Rs.9,18,000/- against petitioner-defendant with costs. The said suit was posted for the defendant’s evidence. At that stage, the petitioner-sole defendant had filed I.A.No.141 of 2023 in O.S.No.197 of 2022 under Order VIII Rule 1(a)(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘CPC’) to receive original entry book dated 29.06.2013 issued by the respondent-plaintiff. He had filed another Interlocutory Application in I.A.No.140 of 2023 in O.S.No.197 of 2022 under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act (for short ‘the Act’) to send the original entry book dated 29.06.2013 issued by the respondent-plaintiff for Expert Opinion to compare his signature on original entry book with that of handwriting of the respondent-plaintiff.

05. It is admitted by the petitioner-defendant that he is the subscriber of chit with respondent-plaintiff for Rs.5,00,000/-. However, according to him, respondent- plaintiff is doing money lending business and the petitioner- defendant approached the respondent-plaintiff for loan of Rs.5,00,000/- on ‘girigiri’ basis. He paid Rs.4,50,000/- by deducting Rs.50,000/-. The said amount has to be repaid in 100 installments @ Rs.5,000/- per day. The petitioner had already paid an amount of Rs.2,10,000/- and respondent issued entry book dated 29.06.2013 by putting his signature. Despite receiving the said amount of Rs.2,10,000/-, the respondent-plaintiff had filed aforesaid suit for recovery of Rs.9,18,000/- suppressing the said fact. Therefore, he filed aforesaid both Interlocutory Applications seeking to receive original entry book dated 29.06.2013 issued by the respondent-plaintiff and for sending the same for Expert Opinion. The said Interlocutory Applications were dismissed by trial Court. Therefore, the present Civil Revision Petitions.

06. As per Order VIII Rule 1(a)(3) of the CPC, if the defendant intends to file relevant documents which were not filed along with written statement, he can file the same by explaining reasons for not filing the same along with written statement. He has to lay foundation for the same.

07. It is relevant to note that the respondent-plaintiff had issued legal notice dated 06.01.2014. The petitioner- defendant has issued reply on 23.01.2014 and also filed written statement in the suit specifically contending the aforesaid facts and also receipt of Rs.2,10,000/- @ Rs.5,000/- per day by the plaintiff and entries made by him in entry book dated 29.06.2013 by putting his signature.

08. It is also relevant to note that the respondent-

plaintiff (PW1) during his cross-examination categorically admitted that he has no objection to forward the said entry book dated 29.06.2013 for Expert Opinion. However, he has denied a suggestion that after receiving the said amounts from the person, he himself made entries in the said book and put initials and writings of the said book belongs to him. 09. With the aforesaid specific pleadings, the petitioner-defendant laid foundation for filing of aforesaid entry book dated 29.06.2013 under Order VIII Rule 1(a)(3) of the CPC. However, the Court below dismissed the said application on the ground that the name of the petitioner is mentioned