Pradhan Spices India Pvt. Ltd vs New India Assurance Company Ltd
2023 Latest Caselaw 9256 Ori

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                CMP NO.748 OF 2023
                 Pradhan Spices India Pvt. Ltd.,   ....                Petitioner
                 Mayurbhanj
                                           Mr. Dwarika Prasad Mohanty, Advocate


                                        -versus-
                 New India Assurance Company Ltd.,         ....    Opp. Parties
                 Baripada Branch and another

                      CORAM:
                      JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
                                   ORDER

Order No.                        14.08.2023

  1.        1.      This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Order dated 6th February, 2023 (Annexure-4) passed by learned District Judge, Mayurbhanj at Baripada in R.F.A. No.68 of 2014 is under challenge in this CMP, whereby it refused to call for the originals of Exhibits 5 and 6 (two insurance policies) from the State Bank of India-Opposite Party No.2.

3. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that Civil Suit No.183 of 2012 was filed in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Baripada claiming Rs.1,43,13,710.30/- from the Defendant No.1- New India Assurance Company Ltd. towards loss caused to the Petitioner- Company in a fire accident. The policies under which the Plaintiffs claim compensation are with the State bank of India, Industrial Estate Branch, Baripada-Defendant No.2 (Opposite Party No.2). Hence, the Plaintiffs exhibited the computer generated copies of those policies as Exhibits 5 and 6 which were

// 2 //

marked in evidence without objection. None of the Defendants have ever raised objection to the genuineness of Exhibits 5 and 6. However, learned trial Court dismissed the suit. In the judgment, an observation as under, has been made.

"Further, Ext.5 and 6 are the computerized copies and the original policy papers to the same are not filed under the suit and in this regard no reasonable explanation has been offered by the Plaintiff."

3.1 It is his submission that when the photocopies of Exhibits 5 and 6 have been admitted in evidence without objection, learned trial Court should not have raised any objection to the effect that originals of those documents were not filed. It is the case of the Plaintiffs that the originals of the said policies are available in the State Bank of India from which the Plaintiff- Company has taken financial assistance. Since the suit was dismissed on merit, the Plaintiff has filed RFA No.30/68 of 2014/22. In order to overcome the observation made by learned trial Court as stated above, the Plaintiff -Petitioner filed an application to call for the originals of Exhibits 5 and 6 from the State Bank of India (Defendant No.2-Opposite party No.2). The said application was rejected on the ground that if the same is entertained at the appellate stage, it would contradict the findings of the learned trial Court on the said issue before hearing of the appeal on merit.

3.2 It is his submission that none of the parties to the appeal would be prejudiced if the originals are called from the State Bank of India-Opposite Party No.2 which are in its custody.

// 3 //

Learned trial Court failed to appreciate the same and dismissed the application. Hence, this CMP has been filed.

4. Taking into consideration the submission made by Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court finds that computerized copies of insurance policies were produced before learned trial Court, the same are marked as exhibits 5 and 6 without any objection. Learned trial Court, while adjudicating the matter, has also discussed their contents. Only because of the aforesaid observation has been made by learned trial Court while dismissing the suit, the same will not be a ground to call for the originals from the State Bank of India-Opposite Party No.2. Since the documents have been marked without objection and none of the parties have raised any objection with regard to their admissibility in evidence at any point of time, the same can be relied upon by learned appellate Court while adjudicating the appeal. Thus, originals of Exhibits 5 and 6 are not required to be called for at the appellate stage.

5. As such, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order under Annexure-4. However, this order will not debar the Court to call for the originals of Exhibits 5 and 6 at a later stage, if the same are required for proper adjudication of the appeal.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed                                                        (K.R. Mohapatra)
Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK
Designation: Junior Stenographer                                              Judge
Reason:   AU
    Rojalin
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 14-Aug-2023 19:09:56