RAJENDRA PRASAD THROUGH Vs. SATYA NARAIN MANDIR SAMITI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter comes-up on Application (82237/18) filed by the appellant under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC read with Section 151 CPC for taking documents on record.

(2.) It is contended by counsel for the appellant-applicant that the trial Court had extended benefit of first default to the appellant and trial Court had given a finding that the appellant has complied with the orders passed under Section 13 (3) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act. It is contended that the rent was provisionally determined on19.4.1997 and the trial Court had directed the appellant to deposit the arrears of rent within a period of 15 days. In para 5 of the application appellant has given the details of the rent deposited by him in pursuance of the direction of the Court and in support of deposit, documents Annexure-1 to Annexure-22 have been annexed. It is contended by counsel for the appellants that the receipts are public documents and are even admissible in evidence. From the receipts it will be evident that the appellant was depositing the rent in advance and rent has been paid upto March 2019.

(3.) It is contended that the appellate Court has held that the appellant has not deposited the rent after determination by the Court. The appellant was not afforded any opportunity to establish before the Court that the rent has been deposited. It is also contended that in the file of the trial Court copies of the rent receipts are available, which were not seen by the appellate Court. It is also contended that these documents are relevant to decide the controversy between the parties and in the interest of justice the documents should be taken on record.