VAIJANATH S/O. CHANNABASAPPA AMBULGE Vs. THE GOVT. OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHAN SOUDHA, BANGALORE-01 AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 18.09.2012 in O.S.No. 54/2010, on the file of the Civil Judge, Basavakalyan. The petitioner is the plaintiff and respondent Nos. 1 to 5 are the defendants in the suit. The plaintiff filed the above suit for declaration and injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. They have filed IA -6 for summoning of the title deed and other related documents of suit schedule property which are in the custody of the 6th respondent. The Court below has rejected the said application.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the 6th respondent -Bank, submits that the documents more fully described in the application IA -6 have been deposited by the plaintiff with the 6th respondent for raising the loan. It was equitable mortgage. Therefore, the said documents cannot be sent to the civil Court. Even otherwise, petitioner can obtain the certified copy of the said documents. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I am in agreement with the submission made on behalf of the 6th respondent. It is not in dispute that the petitioner can obtain the certified copy of those documents and can lead secondary evidence in the suit. If that is so, it is unnecessary to summon those documents. The writ petition is devoid of merits. It is accordingly dismissed. No costs.