T P MANI Vs. PALANISAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 3.4.2009 in unnumbered I.A.No. of 2009 in O.S.No.368 of 2004 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Perundurai, whereby and whereunder the application preferred by the revision petitioner to issue a proclamation as per Order XVI Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure requiring the District Registrar, Ariyalur to produce the sale note book of stamp papers was rejected. BACKGROUND FACTS:-

(2.) THE civil suit in O.S.No.368 of 2004 was instituted by the first respondent against the revision petitioner and second respondent praying for a decree of permanent injunction in respect of the suit property. THE suit was contested by the revision petitioner by filing written statement. Subsequently the suit was taken up for trial.

(3.) IN the affidavit filed in support of the application, it was the contention of the petitioner that the document in Ex.A.4 is a forged one and the said document was created by making use of non- judicial stamp paper, which was stated to have been purchased from a stamp vendor doing business in Perambalur District which is about several hundred kilometres from Sullipalayam, where he is residing. It was only for the purpose of proving the purchase of stamp papers from a vendor, who is doing business elsewhere, he summoned the document from the office of the District Registrar. However in spite of his application in I.A.No.326 of 2008 and the order passed by the trial court to summon the document, the District Registrar, for the reasons best known to him, failed to produce the document. Accordingly the petitioner prayed for issuance of proclamation within the meaning of Order XVI Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure to cause production of the document.