NARESH AMRITLAL SHAH Vs. KANTILAL CHUNILAL SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A common question on which there is a conflict of opinion between single Judges of this Court arises in both these petitions, the question being: whether objections as to the admissibility or mode of proof of evidence, oral and documentary, should be decided upon when raised, or whether they can be deferred to a later stage?

(2.) IN Writ Petition no.1902 of 2005, the petitioners, who are the defendants, have objected to the order dated 12.1.2005 by which the learned trial Judge has marked 126 documents as exhibits with the following direction:-

(3.) ONE view, relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioners is reflected in two decisions of the learned single Judges of this Court, one rendered by R.M.S. Khandeparkar,J. in Durgashankar v. Babubhai (2003 (2) Mh.L.J. 576) and the other rendered by D.Y. Chandrachud, J. in Bharat R. Desai v. Naina M. Bhal (2004 (2) Bom.C.R. 695). In both cases, having regard to the provisions of Order 13 and Order 18 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the two learned single Judges have held that while allowing the parties to lead evidence in the form of affidavits, if objected to, the admissibility of documents must be decided by the Court before the documents are exhibited in evidence and that decision cannot be postponed to a later stage such as the final disposal of the case. The judgments rely on the judgments of the Supreme Court referred to therein.