MUNGALL DEVI Vs. KHUB RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 18.12.1999 passed by the learned sub -Judge, Ani whereby the application of the plaintiffs/petitioners (here -after referred to as "the plaintiffs") under Order 18 Rule 2(4) read with Rule 17 -A and Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereafter referred to as "the Code") has been dismissed.

(2.) The admitted facts are that a suit for declaration instituted by the plaintiffs against the defendants/respondents (here after referred to as "the defendants") is pending disposal before the learned Sub -Judge and is at the stage of final arguments. It was at such stage that the plaintiffs moved an application under Order 18 Rule 2(4) read with Rule 17 -A and Section 151 of the Code praying therein for grant for permission to formally exhibit some of the documents which had been filed at the time of institution of the suit and had been marked at the time of examination of one of the plaintiffs as a witness. It has been averred that it was at the time of preparing the arguments that the plaintiffs realised that due to bonafide mistake such documents, namely, death certificate of Deep Ram, his pension papers, death certificates of Janki, Roshan Lal, electricity bills, copy of pension Register and pension receipt, had been marked but had not been formally exhibited and proved as per the law. It is further claimed that the documents are of the nature which are incapable of being manipulated or forged, hence the application.

(3.) The application was resisted by the defendants. It was averred by the defendants in their reply that the application is motivated, and has been filed with an intent to fill in the lacuna and is not maintainable under the provisions under which it has been filed. It is also averred that the plaintiffs took more than three years to conclude their evidence which stood closed on 23.6.1999 and, thus, the plaintiffs had been negligent and the re -opening of the case is, therefore, not warranted.