Shanti Devi W/O Late Shri Ramji Lal vs Ghanshyam S/O Late Shri Bhulla Ram
2022 Latest Caselaw 3727 Raj/2

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6933/2022

Shanti Devi W/o Late Shri Ramji Lal, R/o Village Malakhera Sub
Tahsil-Malakhera, District Alwar, Rajasthan.
                                                      ----Petitioner/Defendant
                                    Versus
1.       Ghanshyam S/o Late Shri Bhulla Ram, R/o House No.
         197, South West Block, Near Ram Mandir, Alwar.
2.       Rajesh Kumar S/o Late Shri Bhulla Ram, R/o 163, Arya
         Nagar, Alwar Rajasthan.
3.       Smt. Anguri Devi W/o Late Shri Bhulla Ram, R/o 163,
         Arya Nagar, Alwar Rajasthan.
                                                    ----Plaintiffs-Respondents

For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Vijay Kumar Gupta
For Respondent(s)         :



       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL

                                     Order

11/05/2022

This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of

India has been filed by the petitioner/defendant assailing the

legality and validity of the order dated 08.04.2022 passed by the

learned Civil Judge, Malakhera, Alwar whereby, an application filed

by him under Order 8 Rule 1A (3) CPC, has been dismissed.

The facts in brief are that the respondents/plaintiffs filed a

suit for permanent and mandatory injunction against the

petitioner in the year 2012. During course of trial, the petitioner

moved an application under Order 8 Rule 1A (3) CPC seeking

leave of the Court to place on record a photocopy of the Will dated

(2 of 3) [CW-6933/2022]

22.12.1946. The application has been dismissed vide order dated

08.04.2022, impugned herein.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the

learned trial Court erred in dismissing the application only on

ground of delay without appreciating its relevance or admissibility.

He submitted that a document tendered by any of the parties can

be taken on record at any stage and hence, the order dated

08.04.2022 is liable to be quashed and set aside. He, in support of

his submissions, relied upon two judgments of this Court in cases

of I.B.P. Company Ltd. & Anr. versus Smt. Chandra Bai &

Ors.: 2000 DNJ [Raj.] 33 & Ratan Kumari versus Addl.

District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.7, Jaipur City,

Jaipur & Ors.: 2012 (3) DNJ (Raj.) 1373.

Heard. Considered.

A perusal of the order dated 08.04.2022 reveals that the

petitioner moved the application after her evidence was closed

that too after availing a number of opportunities for this purpose.

It has further been observed by the learned trial Court that the

matter was pending consideration since the year 2012 and neither

there was reference of the Will in the written statement filed by

her nor it was brought into picture at any stage including her

evidence. This Court has gone through the application filed by the

petitioner seeking leave of the Court under Order 8 Rule 1A (3)

CPC and finds that it is bereft of any reason as to why no

reference of it was made in the written statement or at any stage

during the trial. Further, it does not reveal a plausible reason for

delay in seeking to place the same on record except that it was

misplaced which is not confidence inspiring.

(3 of 3) [CW-6933/2022]

In view thereof, the learned trial Court did not err in

rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Order 8 Rule

1A (3) CPC.

There is another important aspect of the matter. The

document sought to be placed on record is a photocopy of the

registered Will. No reason has been assigned for not presenting

the Will in original or even a certified copy of the Will. In the garb

of production of the photocopy of the Will, the petitioner could not

have been permitted to start the trial afresh.

In case of I.B.P. Company & Anr. (supra), a Coordinate

Bench of this Court has held that a document can be taken on

record at any stage of the proceedings where a Court does not

have any doubt about its relevance and admissibility. In the

present case, as already held, it is a photocopy of the registered

Will which has been sought to be placed on record at the stage of

final arguments without assigning any reason for non production

of its original or at least a certified copy.

Similarly, in case of Ratan Kumari (supra), the writ petition

filed against an order of the learned trial Court allowing an

application under Order 8 Rule 1A (3) CPC, was dismissed.

The upshot of the aforesaid discussion is that the writ

petition is devoid of merit and is dismissed accordingly.

(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J

Manish/93

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)