The Karnataka High Court allowed a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated 18.06.2020 passed on the application filed by the plaintiff under Order XI Rule 16 r/w section 151 of the code of civil procedure made on the file of the Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and dismiss the said application. The Court observed that the defendants/petitioners herein said that they have lost their original GPA and have also produced acknowledgment for having filed a police complaint in that regard.
Brief Facts:
Respondent No.1/plaintiff filed an application under Order XI Rule 16 of CPC, praying for a direction to defendants to produce original General Power of Attorney (GPA) dated 29.08.2002 said to have been executed by one K. V. Krishnaswamy Iyengar in favor of Sathyanarayana Reddy. Petitioner No.1/defendant No.2 filed a memo stating that the defendant had lost his original GPA and also filed acknowledgment for having filed a police complaint. A certified copy of the same was placed on record.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that when a certified copy of the GPA is placed on record and when it is the case of petitioners/defendants that the original GPA is lost, the trial Court could not have directed the defendants to produce the original GPA. Thus, he prayed for allowing the writ petition.
Contentions of the Respondents:
The Learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted that GPA is not a registered document and the same was produced before other courts in different proceedings i.e., a certified copy which is placed on record. Further, the learned counsel contended that the plaintiff disputes GPA and hence, called upon the defendants to produce the original GPA.
The Court observed that the trial Court committed an error in allowing I.A. filed under Order XI Rule 16 of CPC, to produce the original GPA. Order XI Rule 16 of CPC permits the issuance of notice to any party to produce any documents referred to in pleadings or affidavits. The defendants/petitioners herein said that they have lost their original GPA and have also produced acknowledgment for having filed a police complaint in that regard. Moreover, the defendants placed on record the certified copy of the same, which was produced before the Court in other proceedings. When it is the case of the defendants that they have lost the original GPA, the Court could not have directed the defendants to produce the original of the same. The Court could evaluate the certified copy and if it is permissible to look into the said document, it could look into it.
The decision of the Court:
The Karnataka High Court, allowing the petition, held that I.A.No.1/2023 does not survive for consideration.
Case Title: Sri. S. Ravi Kumar & Anr. v Sri. Chinnappa V. & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice S. G. Pandit
Case no.: WRIT PETITION NO. 9324 OF 2020 (GM-CPC)
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Nauman S.
Advocate for the Respondents: Mr. Manoj
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :