NURALLAH KAMRUDDIN VELJEE Vs. VISHWAMBHAR KASHINATH PALEKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent.

(2.) By this Writ Petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 09.07.2015 passed by the Ad hoc Civil Judge Senior Division, B-Court, Panaji, by which the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff seeking leave of the Court to produce additional documents through his witness has been rejected.

(3.) The application in question, no doubt, seeks leave of the Court to produce documents through the witness of the petitioner, although, the application ought to have been on the lines as required under the relevant provisions of the C.P.C. The application is not happily drafted, but, would it mean that for such a reason or to be precise, for the mistake attributable to an Advocate of the party, interest of justice should suffer ?........ and my answer is no.