AMIT SEHGAL Vs. RAJESH SANDHYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has assailed order dtd. 16/11/2023 of the learned commercial court, whereby application of the petitioner/plaintiff (filed at the stage of final arguments) under Order VII Rule 14 CPC and under Order XVIII Rule 3 CPC for permission to file additional documents was dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner/plaintiff but none appears on behalf of the respondent and since the predecessor bench had directed the learned trial court to hear final arguments but not to pass orders, I find no reason to adjourn the matter awaiting counsel for respondent.

(2.) Broadly speaking, it appears that in the suit for recovery of money, the petitioner/plaintiff at the stage of final arguments filed the application for permission to place on record additional documents, taking the ground that the petitioner/plaintiff is asthmatic patient and at the time of filing the suit, invoices of transactions between the parties for the period from 1/4/2018 onwards along with ledger account were not filed, but during cross-examination of petitioner/plaintiff, the other side denied the previous transactions, so the present application was required. After hearing both sides, the learned trial court dismissed the application by way of the impugned order.

(3.) It is contended on behalf of petitioner/plaintiff that on account of his illness related to prostate, the petitioner/plaintiff could not file complete documents at appropriate stage. Learned counsel for petitioner/plaintiff contends that in view of cross-examination of plaintiff, it has become necessary for the petitioner/plaintiff to place on record additional documents pertaining to transactions from the year 2018 onwards. No other submission has been advanced.