RAMKARAN Vs. DHANNI DEVI LASHKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff') against the order dated 20.9.2019 passed by the Trial Court in Civil Suit No. 88/2014, whereby the application filed by the respondent- defendant (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendant') under Order 8 Rule 1 (3) CPC for taking the document on record has been allowed

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that the plaintiff filed a suit for eviction and recovery of rent under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The defendant put in appearance and filed the written statement. During the pendency of the suit, the defendant filed an application under Order 8 Rule 1 (3) CPC, which has been allowed by the Trial Court vide order dated 20.9.2019 subject to payment of cost of Rs. 2000/-. Hence, this writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the suit was filed in the year 2014, issues were framed on 22.2.2017 and the matter was fixed for plaintiff's evidence. The evidence of the plaintiff was completed on 10.4.2018 and the matter was fixed for defendant's evidence. The evidence of the defendant was completed on 24.5.2019 and the case was fixed for rebuttal of the plaintiff's evidence. The plaintiff denied to produce the evidence in rebuttal and thereafter the matter was fixed for final arguments. The defendant intentionally filed the application for taking the documents on record in order to delay the trial, which is at its fag end. He further submits that the documents document taken on record are related to the year 2001 to 2013. It means that the said documents were readily available and in possession of the defendant, but the defendant did not explain the delay in filing the application. He further submits that if the documents are taken on record after evidence of both the parties, then the case would again be opened for re-trial. However, the learned Trial Court has utterly failed to consider this aspect of the matter. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set-aside.