RABIYA BI Vs. KESHAV VASSUDEV BHAT KELKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A.D. Bhobe, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. P. Rao, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel. Learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 waives service.

(2.) The above petition takes exception to an order dated 2/06/2015 passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division at Ponda whereby an application filed by the petitioner for leave to rely upon the additional documents came to be dismissed.

(3.) Mr. A.D. Bhobe, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has pointed out that the petitioner desires to rely upon two judgments in the suit wherein the respondents were parties in respect of the disputed property. The learned Counsel further points out that such judgments are very much relevant for the purpose of deciding the matter in controversy as according to him the said two judgments are in respect of the disputed property and the finding therein are binding on the respondents. The learned Counsel further points out that the suit filed by the respondents is for eviction as well as for demolition of a structure existing in the same property and, as such, according to him such judgments would be relevant for deciding the matter in controversy. The learned Counsel further points out that besides the said two judgments the petitioner also sought to produce 7 documents which were relied upon in the list of documents filed along with the written statement and the copies thereof are already part of the record. The learned Counsel further submits that merely because the list was not in terms of the form specified under Order 13 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, the learned Judge has refused leave to the petitioner. The learned Counsel, as such, submits that the impugned order be quashed and set aside.