AJIT KUMAR DAS Vs. DILIP KUMAR GHOSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated March 1, 2024, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) 4th Court at Alipore, District 24 Parganas (south) in Title Suit No.2487 of 2016, is under challenge in this revisional application.

(2.) By the order impugned, the learned court rejected an application under Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. After closure of evidence, the petitioner wanted to recall himself, in order to adduce further evidence and prove some documents. It was contended that the petitioner could lay his hand on those documents at a later stage. The learned court was of the view that the application could not be allowed. The recall was not permissible for the purpose of admitting documents in evidence, when the basis or the foundation of those documents were not available from the written statement. According to the learned court, what was not pleaded, could not be suddenly adduced in evidence. No party could be put at a disadvantage. It would not be proper for the Court to allow evidence beyond pleadings. In the absence of pleadings and also in the absence of any explanation as to why the said documents had neither been produced earlier nor mentioned in the written statement, the prayer for recall was rejected.

(3.) Ms. Shamolima Sarkar, learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the provisions of Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure could always be invoked for recall of a witness, even if, Order 18 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure had been deleted. Earlier, the Code had a specific provision under Order 18 Rule 17, for recall of witness at any stage. However, the deletion of the said provision would not take away the inherent power of the court to permit production of such evidence, which were relevant and necessary. Ends of justice demanded that the petitioner should be permitted to recall himself.