SANGAM KNITTING WORKS Vs. MASTER & CO ETC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-firm brought a suit for the recovery of Rs. 6,570/- against the respondents on the plea that certain goods had been supplied to them. During the course of trial, the petitioner-firm made an application for the summoning of certain record from the office of the Excise and Taxation Officer, Ludhiana in support of their plea that the said goods had been supplied to the respondents through one of their managers namely Gian Chand. The record to be summoned is described as follows in the application dated 28th of March, 1979, made for this purpose :-

(2.) This prayer of the petitioner was disallowed by the trial Court when the said record was brought by the Clerk of the Sales Tax Department, who also raised the objection that in view of the provisions of Section 26 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, the said record could not be produced by way of evidence. What Section 26 bars to be produced or summoned by way of evidence is any statement made, return furnished or accounts or documents produced in accordance with the said Act or any record of evidence given in the course of any proceedings under the said Act. Apparently, the applications alleged to have been filed by Gian Chand for seeking adjournments or any other similar purpose in his capacity as manager of the respondent-firm, does not fall within the four-corners of the record stated above. At the same time, it also needs to be noticed that the petitioner has not furnished any particulars of any such application which according to the learned counsel is sought to be produced. Apparently, the petitioner cannot be allowed to fish out evidence by summoning the record before supplying particulars of the record which he seeks to produce in support of his plea. In view of the above matter, I do not find any merit in this petition and dismiss the same but with no order as to costs.