SHANTHA BAI Vs. KRISHNA BAI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is absolutely no merit in this civil revision petition filed by the defendant against the dismissal order in I.A. No. 5866 of 1995 in O.S. No. 915 of 1983 on the file of VIII Assistant City Civil Judge, Madras, for excusing the delay in filing certain documents.

(2.) The petition was filed under Order 13 Rule 2 CPC. The suit O.S. No. 915 of 1983 was filed about 12 years prior to the filing of the said I.A. No. 5866 of 1995. That apart, in the affidavit filed in support of the I.A. No. 5866 of 1995 no reason at all has been given as to why those documents could not be produced in time. Order 13 Rule 1 C.P.C. says that at or before settlement of issues documents have to be produced.

(3.) It is also not stated when actually issues were framed in the suit. Eventhough it is not stated in the supporting affidavit to the Interlocutory Application the learned counsel for the petitioner also was also unable to say when actually issues were framed. While Order 13 Rule 1 CPC says that the documents should be produced at or before settlement of issues Rule 2(1) says that no documentary evidence shall be received at any subsequent stage of the proceedings unless good cause is shown to the satisfaction of the court for the non production thereof. In the present case absolutely no cause is shown why the abovesaid documents were not produced within the time allowed under Order 13 Rule 1 CPC. The supporting affidavit simply says as follows:-