RAMCHANDRA Vs. PREM BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A preliminary objection is raised by the counsel for respondents that this revision is not maintainable against the order refusing to receive documents. He relied upon the judgment in the case of Jagjit Cotton Textiles Mills Ltd. and etc. v. Union of India and etc.. In support of his contention, he also relied upon the judgment in the case of Hemendra Chaudhary v. M/s Punjab National Bank & Ors.2. This judgment of Hemendra Chaudhary relates to refusal of accepting documents and it is held that the order allowing is not a case decided under Section 1.15, Code of Civil Procedure. In this case, the documents were filed after the arguments were over; however, the application was allowed admitting the documents in evidence at the late stage of suit.

(2.) Considering the facts of this case, the defendant sought to produce certified copy of the Will in the evidence. He sought permission of the Court to produce certified copy of the Will. The defendant has filed written statement and pleaded about the Will, but the Will was not filed along with the written statement. The Trial Court relying upon Order VIII, Rule 8-A, Code of Civil Procedure, held that the documents ought to have been filed along with the written statement and a list of reliance should have been submitted. The Trial Court held that the defendant has failed to demonstrate the reason for not filing the Will along with written statement. The defendant has stated in his application that original Will is lost and he has received certified copy of the registered Will. The Trial Court found that the Will was within the knowledge of the defendant. Though he filed written statement, filing of Will at the late stage is not permissible, therefore, the application was dismissed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner invited attention to Order VIII, Rule 1, Code of Civil Procedure, and submitted that under Order VIII, Rule 1(2)(a), the defendant is required to annex the list to the written statement of the documents relied upon by him. He invited attention to Order VIII, Rule 1(3), which provides that where any such document is not in possession or power of the defendant, he shall, wherever possible, state in whose possession or power it is. Order VIII, Rule 1(5) provides that a document, which ought to be entered in the list referred to in sub-rule (2), and which is not so entered, shall not, without the leave of the Court, be received in evidence on behalf of the defendant at the hearing of the suit.