NAHJIYA Vs. BUCHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners / plaintiffs have challenged the order dtd. 10/5/2024 passed by the trial Court whereby their application under Order 7 Rule 14 of the CPC for taking documents on record has been rejected and so also has their application under Order 17 Rule 1 of the CPC for grant of time. Consequently, the right of the plaintiffs to adduce evidence has been closed.

(2.) From a perusal of the record of the case, it is seen that the suit has been instituted by the plaintiffs on or about 22/2/2023. The written statement of the defendants was filed on 26/9/2023 after which the issues have been framed on 24/11/2023. Thereafter, the case was fixed for recording of plaintiffs' evidence and plaintiff has examined one witness on their part after which the case was fixed for recording of their further evidence.

(3.) On 10/5/2024 an application under Order 7 Rule 14 of the CPC was filed by the plaintiffs for taking certain documents on record which has been rejected only on the ground that no reason has been given as to why the documents could not be produced earlier and at the time of filing of the suit. The said approach of the trial Court in my opinion is extremely harsh and hyper-technical. The evidence of the plaintiffs was in progress and it is not a case where the suit is an old one but has been instituted in 2023 itself. The relevance or importance of the documents sought to be produced by the plaintiffs has wholly been omitted to be considered by the trial Court which has rejected the application observing that plaintiffs are attempting to prolong their case. There does not appear to be any reason as to why the plaintiffs would do so. The documents if are brought on record would be helpful for a fair and complete determination of the dispute between the parties but have illegally been declined to be taken on record which is erroneous.