MOHAN LAL VARINDER KUMAR Vs. PIARA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER -plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 30960. The plaintiff while filing the suit attached copies of bahi entries as Annexure A with the plaint. Defendant was proceeded ex-parte. The bahi entries were exhibited during ex-parte proceedings on the statement of Ashok Kumar, PW1 along with true translation of the entries, as the entries were in "lande" character. The suit was ultimately decreed on 14.8.1987.

(2.) DEFENDANT moved an application after the passing of the ex-parte decree for setting aside the ex-parte decree which was dismissed by the trial Court. However, on appeal the application was allowed and ex-parte decree was set aside by order dated 16.9.1991 and matter was remitted to the trial Court to decide the suit afresh in accordance with law.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner, during the course of hearing of this petition, submitted that the entries sought to be proved are already on record and in fact had been filed with the plaint itself. These entries were exhibited before passing of the ex-parte decree. Not only this, these very entries which were available on record, were put to the defendant-respondent, when he appeared as his own witnesses as DW-2. Learned counsel further submits that once documents had been exhibited and put to the defendant, the same ought to have been allowed to be proved, by producing the Munim by way of additional evidence. It was on account of sheer mistake of learned counsel for the plaintiff that the entries could not be got exhibited in the second round of litigation under the impression that the same already stood exhibited.