The single judge bench of the Jharkhand High Court held that the documentary evidence was not filed at the time of written statement despite due diligence, the same may be taken on record at subsequent stage if those documents are necessary for the adjudication of the issues between the parties.
Brief facts
The factual matrix of the case is that the petition was filed by the petitioner under Order VIII Rule 1A(3) C.P.C. for a grant of leave to produce the documents. However, the same was rejected by the learned civil judge. Aggrieved by this, the present writ petition is filed.
Contentions of the Petitioner
The Petitioner submitted that at the stage of the evidence of the Plaintiff, the defendant moved an application to produce certain documents which he could not file at the time of filing the written statement, and the said application was rejected by the learned trial court.
Observations of the court
The Hon’ble court observed that the trial court rejected the application on the sole ground that no reason has been assigned by this defendant in regard to his failure to adduce the same at the time of filing the written statement. From the bare perusal of the application, it can be seen that the defendant provided a reason for not producing these documents at the time of filing of the written statement as they were not in the knowledge of the defendant at the time of filing the written statement.
The court furthermore observed that if, despite exercising due diligence, the documentary evidence was not filed at the time of the written statement, it may still be included in the record at a later stage if it is required to resolve the disputes between the parties. The parties may present evidence later in the suit that demonstrates a good reason for not producing them when the suit is filed or when a written statement is filed, even after the provision under Order XVIII Rule 17A of the CPC has been deleted.
The court relied upon the judgment titled Salem Advocate Bar Association Tamil Nadu vs Union of India.
Based on these considerations, the court set aside the impugned order passed by the learned trial court.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court allowed the writ petition.
Case Title: Budhuwa Oraon V. .Ghura Oraon
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Subhash Chand
Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 6367 of 2016
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Sandeep Verma, Advocate
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
