GUPTA INVESTMENT CENTRE, BARODA Vs. PRIYAKANT CHANDRAVADAN MOGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) .- The order passed by the learned 3rd Joint Civil Judge (S.D.) at Baroda on 11th Aug., 1986 below the application at Exh. 3 in Special Civil Suit No. 210 of 1980 is under challenge in this Appeal from Order. Thereby the learned trial Judge was pleased to dismiss the present appellant's suit under Order 11 Rule 21 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 ('the Code' for brief).

(2.) The appears that the present appellant filed one suit against the present respondent in the Court of the Civil Judge (S.D.) at Baroda for a decree in the sum of Rs. 68,935.68 ps. It was registered as Special Civil Suit No. 210 of 1980. The present respondent appears to have filed his written statement and resisted the suit. He appears to have made one application in the suit proceedings calling upon the present appellant to produce certain books of accounts purported to have been, relied on by it in support of the decree as prayed for. That application appears to have been taken on the record of the suit proceedings as Exh. 33. The suit appears to have been assigned to the 6th Joint Civil Judge, (S.D.) at'Baroda. By his order passed on 10th April, 1986 below the application at Exh. 33 in the suit proceedings, the learned Judge directed the present appellant to produce the documents as prayed for in the application'or to file an affidavit in the prescribed form on or before 25th April, 1986. It appears that the aforesaid order passed by the learned Judge on 10th April, 1986 was not complied with by the present appellant. It appears that the suit was thereafter assigned to the learned 3rd Joint Civil Judge (S.D.) at Baroda for trial and disposal. By his order passed on 11th Aug., 1986 below the application at Exh. 33 in Special Civil Suit No. 210 of 1980, the learned Judge was pleased to dismiss the suit under Order 11 Rule 21 of the Code for non-compliance with the earlier order passed on 10th April, 1986. The aggrieved appellant has questioned the correctness of the said order by means of this Appeal from Order.

(3.) The principles governing the method and the manner for exercise or powers under Order 11 Rule 21 of the Code are succincly laid down by the Supreme Court in its ruling in the case of M/S Babbar Sewing Machine Co. Vs. Tirlok Nath Mahajan, reported in, AIR 1978 Supreme Court 1436 . It has been held: