A party cannot use interlocutory applications for witness summons under Order XVI Rule 14 CPC to compel the opposing party to produce documents or provide evidence to prove the applicant's own case, especially when the evidentiary stage is largely complete and such powers are discretionary to the Court.

O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the Order and Decree dated 20.06.2019 in I.A.No.429 of 2019 in O.S.No.155 of 2011 passed by the learned VIII Additional District Judge, Rangareddy District, at L.B. Nagar.

2. Heard Sri Anuj Raj, learned counsel representing Sri Rakesh Sanghi, learned counsel for the revision petitioners and Sri Ashok Kumar Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the entire material on record.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter referred to, as they are arrayed before the Trial Court.

4. The brief facts of the case are that the respondents herein who are the plaintiffs filed the suit for the relief of specific performance of agreements of sale dated 07.02.2006 and 30.12.2008 and further, sought reliefs as under:

a) Defendant Nos.1, 2 and 8 to 11 be directed to execute the Registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs in respect of 2/3rd undivided share equivalent to 4114 Sq. yards out of 6171 Sq. Yards (Ac.1-11 guntas) in Sy.No.66/10/B, situated at Mansoorabad Village, Sarrornagar Mandal, Rangareddy District.

b) Costs of the suit be awarded.

i) (OR) alternatively defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 8 to 11 may be directed to pay the sum of Rs.1 crore to the plaintiff.

ii) interest @18% P.A. on Rs.60 lakhs from the date of suit till the date of realization and interest @ 18% P.A. on Rs.40 lakhs from 01.11.2011 till the date of realization.

c) Any other reliefs to which the plaintiffs are entitled to, me also to granted.

5. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioners herein/defendants therein have filed IA No.429 of 2019 under Order XVI Rule 1 r/w. Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking issuance of witness summons to plaintiff Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5.

6. The brief facts of the said application are that the petitioners wanted to summon respondent Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5/plaintiffs as witnesses on the ground that the petitioners/defendants wanted to examine the respondents/plaintiffs to know the source of advance money and contended that the respondents/plaintiffs used the black money and were involved in investing the said black money for purchasing the properties in litigation.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants argued that the respondents/plaintiffs were in the business of purchasing disputed properties by using black money. The contention of the petitioners/defendants that they issued a statutory notice dated 07.12.2017 requesting the respondents/plaintiffs to produce the mentioned documents for substantiating the bonafides of their suit claim as mentioned below:

i. The Plaintiffs may kindly produce the audited books all the individual Plaintiffs including the audited books of the Late Bavairan Andhani being maintained under Section. 44 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the contemporary period along with the tax returns and record along with financial records for co relating Bank Statements and commercial service tax returns and the entire financial proof to prove the entries in the said determining the Income and turnover of each individual agreement holder for the contemporary period.

ii. The Income Tax alongwith The Plaintiffs may kindly produce returns of each Plaintiff (agreement holder) schedules to the said Income Tax Returns and also the Income returns of the Late Savairam Andhani alongwith proof