LAWS(BOM)-2021-2-280

BINA DEEGAN Vs. SARAS GOPI

Decided On February 25, 2021
Bina Deegan Appellant
V/S
Saras Gopi Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In a suit for declaration being S.C. Suit No. 1233 of 2017, in relation to immovable property, Petitioner/Plaintiff took out Chamber Summons No. 721 of 2019 under the provisions of Order 11 Rule 12 of CPC, which came to be rejected on 23/10/2019. As such, this Petition.

(2.) Mr. God bole, learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Plaintiff while inviting attention of this Court to the pleadings in S.C. Suit No. 1233 of 2017, particularly the prayer made therein, would urge that the Court below has committed an error of law in rejecting the Chamber Summons taken out, praying for issuance of order of discovery. According to him, since the trial in the suit has not commenced and to find out exact truth in view of rival contentions from the pleadings, it is necessary to exercise powers under Order 11 Rule 12 of CPC, thereby granting discovery. Further contention is, the Court is not powerless to grant discovery at the stage where evidence of the Plaintiff is being recorded. Relying on the judgment in the matters of NTPC Ltd vs. Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in (2015) 1 Bom CR 612 and Bhagwani Devi Mohata Hospital vs. A.D.J. Rajgarh and Anr reported in AIR 2005 Raj 274, he would urge that this is a fit case wherein Court should have exercised discretion vested in it. Further contention of Mr. God bole is, Court erred in recording a reason that the stage of discovery is over and hence the application taken out for discovery is not maintainable.

(3.) Per contra, learned Counsel for Respondent No.1/Defendant No.1 would urge that the order impugned is just and proper as the Court has recorded correct reasons in support of prayer for rejection of the Chamber Summons. It is further claimed that the Petitioner is indulging in roving inquiry so as to collect evidence. Reply given to Chamber Summons that too on affidavit dealing with documents on which reliance is sought, is relied upon by learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1/Defendant No.1 for pursuing prayer for rejection of the Petition.