KAMLESHSINGH Vs. JAYALAXMI KANTILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed impugning the order dated 7th March, 2008, passed by the Small Causes Court, Mumbai, whereby the Application filed by the respondent under Order 11, Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure to direct the petitioner to produce all the documents mentioned in the notice dated 12th February, 2008, came to be allowed.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that he is the landlord and co-owner of the suit building. The respondent is the mother of the deceased monthly tenant. The suit being RAE Suit No. 316/498/2007 is filed by the petitioner against the respondent inter alia on the ground of non-user. The issues in the suit were framed by the trial Court and directions were issued to the parties to complete the inspection of the documents on or before 9th January, 2008. The respondent has disputed the title of the petitioner and one of the issues framed in the suit is whether the petitioner is the landlord of the suit building. The affidavit of examination-in-chief was filed by the petitioner and the documents produced by him were marked as exhibits. Now the petitioner's cross-examination is in progress. The petitioner alleges that during the cross-examination irrelevant questions were being asked and the respondent is unnecessarily calling upon the petitioner to produce the documents which are not relied upon by him and not relevant for the purpose of deciding the issues.

(3.) The petitioner's case is that though the matter was part heard, the respondent's Advocate had addressed a notice dated 12th February, 2008 under Order 11, Rule 16 of Civil Procedure Code calling upon the petitioner to produce the following documents :-