HARI MOHAN PANGORIYA Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSTANT writ petition has been filed by the defendant -petitioner assailing the order dated. 03/09/2012 passed by the trial court by which, the learned trial court has permitted the plaintiffs -respondents to exhibit certain documents in evidence. Counsel for defendant -petitioner submits that the learned trial court has erred in passing the order impugned without considering that the documents (newspaper cutting and legal notice) cannot be exhibited in view of the fact that the legal notice to which the plaintiffs -respondents wanted to be exhibited, did not bear any signature either of the party or of the advocate nor any seal of the concerned Advocate was there on the legal notice and, as such, the same being secondary evidence, cannot be permitted to be exhibited and as regards the newspaper cutting, since it is newspaper cutting which does not disclose as to when it was published and in which newspaper and that apart the news, being based on hearsay, cannot be said to be reliable and, therefore, the order impugned passed by the learned trial court deserves to be interfered.

(2.) AFTER hearing counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material available on record including the order impugned, this Court does not find any substance in the submission made by learned counsel for the defendant -petitioner for the reason that the learned trial court has allowed and permitted the plaintiffs -respondents to exhibit the said documents in evidence after arriving at a specific finding that the newspaper cutting corroborates with the pleadings made by the plaintiffs -respondents in their plaint and it is not beyond the pleadings made in the suit by the plaintiffs -respondents and, as such, the document (newspaper cutting) deserves to be exhibited. As regards the legal notice, the learned trial court has arrived at a finding that the legal notice had been given by an Advocate and since reply to the legal notice itself has been got exhibited by the counsel, therefore, there cannot be any suspicion on the authenticity of such document and the same also deserves to be exhibited in evidence.