KALIYA PERUMAL Vs. DHANDAPANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the dismissal of the application filed by the Plaintiff to recall the documents marked as Exs.B1 to B3 and B11 from the evidence of DW1 and PW1, the present civil revision petition is filed by the Plaintiff.

(2.) The Plaintiff has filed the suit for declaration of title and for consequential injunction restraining the Defendant from interfering with his enjoyment of the property. During the course of cross-examination of PW1, an unregistered and unstamped release deed dated 19.3.1999 was marked on behalf of the Defendant through the Plaintiff. Exs.B2, B3 and B11, which were only xerox copies, were also marked. Therefore, the Plaintiff filed a petition praying to recall the documents marked as Exs.B1 to B3 and B11 from the evidence of DW1 and PW1. It has also been contended by the Plaintiff that even before the petition filed under Order VII Rule 14(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure by the Defendant to receive those documents was disposed of by the Trial Court, those documents were exhibited and marked.

(3.) The Defendant resisted the petition on the ground that the application filed by the Defendant under Order VII Rule 14(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure was already allowed by the Trial Court, but, by mistake, the said order was inscribed on the notes paper of the suit. The documents have already been proved in earlier proceedings. Further, the original of Ex.B1 was marked later as Ex.B4. Therefore, it was contended by the Defendant that the Plaintiff cannot seek for recalling of those documents from the evidence of DW1 and PW1.