MANAKLAL Vs. NANDLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE grievance made by the petitioners is that the Court was pleased to re-call the defendant Manaklal for the purpose of his examination in respect of some documents. However, a request was made for the purpose of re-calling the petitioner for asking him some questions in respect of mutation entries, effected in the property register maintained by the Municipal Council, Mandsaur. Shri Bhatnagar submitted that on account of this order, injustice is being caused to the present petitioners as it is studded with discrimination.

(2.) I do not find any substance in the submissions because the Court has pointed out in its Order that there was sufficient opportunity for the petitioners to get the certified copies of the said register and put the questions when he was examined. By pointing out this, the Court has said that the Court did not feel it necessary to call the concerned clerk of the Municipal Council, Mandsaur with such documents and the attesting witnesses of the registered sale deeds.

(3.) THE Code of Civil Procedure contemplates the necessary steps to be taken by the litigant engaged in the litigation at various stages. If the structure of the Civil Procedure Code is carefully examined, it is obviously clear that a chronological blossoming of the procedure which is necessary for the purpose of conducting the trials and proceedings has been indicated conferring number of rights, privileges to the litigants as well as indicating the obligations put on them. That has been done for the purpose of securing the clean stream of progress of the suit and the proceedings in the Civil Courts. The tendency of negligence, laziness, short-sightedness has been cured with restrictions. Indolents have been put to punishment on account of deliberate negligence and laziness, if shown, in the progress of the suit or proceedings. All these provisions are meaningful and brought into existence with a particular intention of nipping out the irrelevancy likely to be introduced in the record of the suits or proceedings. What the Civil Court is to do, is to keep itself informed of these provisions and to secure a clean stream of the progress of such suits and proceedings. Needless to say that Civil Courts have been empowered with the powers which are indicated by the provisions of Section 151, CPC for the purpose of safeguarding the interest of justice but in fit cases. Law does not help the indolents. The Court would not be interested in calling the witnesses whom the litigant should have examined when he had the opportunity of doing so. However, the Court would be permitted to recall the witness who is already present in the Court for the purpose of enabling the litigant to put him necessary questions for the purpose of finding out the truth which is necessary for adjudication of the suit or proceedings. Careful and law abiding litigant gets the tilting scale in his favour, though he may be blamable for the laziness shown by him, at the initial stage. A person who finds a bird in nest is always having the opportunity of getting it. A litigant who does not find a bird in the nest has either to thank or blame himself. In such cases adversory cannot be permitted to make the grievance of discrimination. I do not find that the present petitioners would be put to prejudice on account of survival of the Order which has been put to challenge. If he produces the certified copy of the public documents, he would be entitled to make the argument on it by seeking necessary leave of the Court and in such cases I do not think that the Court would refuse the leave. The litigants have to understand the importance of disciplined behaviour at one time or the other stages of trial. Thus, the petition stands dismissed with these observations.