KANAHIYALAL BASUR Vs. NAGAR NIGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assails the legality and validity of the order dtd. 3/10/2019 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge No.4, Jaipur Metropolitan whereby the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) CPC has been dismissed.

(2.) The facts in brief are that the petitioner filed a suit for mandatory injunction against the respondents/defendants. After closure of evidence of the parties, he moved an application under Order 7 Rule 14 CPC which has been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order dtd. 3/10/2019, impugned herein.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that it is his suit for mandatory injunction wherein his immovable property has been seized by the respondents and hence, no oblique motive of delay in trial could be imputed upon him. Referring the provisions of Order 13 Rules 1 & 3 CPC, learned counsel submitted that he did not file the original documents in question before settlement of the issues as he intended to produce the same at the time of cross-examination of the defendants-witnesses. He submitted that while rejecting his application, learned trial Court has failed to exercise a discretion vested in it under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) CPC. He, in support of his submissions, relied on following judgments: (1) Basid Singh & Ors. Vs. Puran Singh & Ors.; S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.16379/2010, (2) Onkarlal Vs. Abdul Rashid & Anr.; S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14373/2011 & (3) Chandan Singh Vs. Deewan Singh; S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1111/2018. He, therefore, prayed that the order impugned dtd. 3/10/2019 be quashed and his application be allowed. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents supporting the findings recorded by the learned trial Court contended that the same do not warrant any interference of this Court under its supervisory jurisdiction. He, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.