M. RATNA REDDY Vs. P. SUSHIL RAMCHANDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision has been filed assailing the docket order dtd. 18/11/2016 in O.S.No.1433 of 2013 on the fie of the XVIII Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad by the second defendant whereby the document/minutes of the meeting dtd. 8/11/2014 (hereinafter for brevity 'the document') sought to be marked while examining PW-2, was rejected.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and respondent and perused the record.

(3.) The relevant facts needed for this revision are that the first respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for perpetual injunction. In the suit, the revision petitioner/second defendant filed petition vide I.A.No.204 of 2016 under Order VIII Rule 1(A)(3) of Code of Civil Procedure seeking leave of the Court to receive 'the document'. That petition was allowed on 9/9/2016. Thereafter, when the document was placed for marking during the examination of PW-2, the first respondent/plaintiff raised objection to receive the document in evidence by citing authorities. Considering the same, the Court in the impugned docket order had rejected to receive the document in evidence on the ground that the document was an outcome of negotiations for settlement.