GOPAL Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE NO. 3

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners -plaintiffs, challenging the order dated 09/04/2013 passed by the Additional District Judge No. 3, Jaipur District, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court') in Civil Suit No. 72 of 2012 (293 of 2006), whereby the Trial Court has dismissed the application of the petitioners filed under Section 90 of the Evidence Act, for drawing the presumption in respect of the document dated 21/09/1957.

(2.) AFTER arguing for sometime, the learned counsel Mr. Ajeet Bhandari, for the petitioners submits that the original of the document is lying with the Revenue Court in some other proceedings, and the petitioners will have to get back the said original document for being produced before the Trial Court, and that the petitioners are also ready and willing to pay the requisite stamp duty and penalty required to be paid under the Rajasthan Stamp Act, for the said document being read in evidence.

(3.) HAVING regard to the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, and to the impugned order passed by the Trial Court, the Court is of the opinion that the petitioners -plaintiffs having produced the copy of the document in question, purported to be more than 30 years old, and the same being also not duly registered under the Registration Act and not duly stamped under the Rajasthan Stamp Act, such a document could not be admitted in evidence or exhibited. The Court, therefore, does not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Trial Court. However, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is directed that as and when the original document is produced by the petitioners before the Trial Court for being read in evidence, the respondents -defendants shall be at liberty to raise the objections and the Trial Court shall decide the admissibility of such document in accordance with law without being influenced by the observations made in the impugned order, as well as in this order.