Kalyan Sahay S/O Hanuman Ram vs Balmukund Joshi S/O Late Shri ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7246 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8227/2019

Kalyan Sahay S/o Hanuman Ram, Aged About 76 Years, R/o
Gram Banuda, Tehsil Dataramgarh, Distt.- Sikar (Raj.)
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.     Balmukund Joshi S/o Late Shri Satyanarayan Joshi, Aged
       About 43 Years, Caste Brahman, Resident Of Chhoti Basti,
       Pushkar, Distt. Ajmer (Raj.)
2.     Smt. Mangi Bai W/o Late Ramlal, Residing At Gram Bhim,
       District- Rajsamand (Raj.)
3.     Krishan Lal S/o Late Ramlal, Residing At Gram Bhim,
       District- Rajsamand (Raj.)
4.     Champalal S/o Late Ramlal, Residing At Gram Bhim,
       District- Rajsamand (Raj.)
5.     Madan Lal S/o Late Ramlal, Residing At Gram Bhim,
       District- Rajsamand (Raj.)
6.     Kailash S/o Late Ramlal, Residing At Gram Bhim, District-
       Rajsamand (Raj.)
7.     Smt. Nani W/o Bhanwari D/o Shri Ramlal, R/o Gram
       Nundri Meelwali, Tehsil- Beawar, Distt.- Ajmer.
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajeev Surana, Senior Adv. with assisted by Mr. Sankalp Sogani, Adv.

& Ms. Muskan Verma, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Reashm Bhargava, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

14/11/2022

This Civil Writ Petition has been filed under Article 227

of the Constitution of India against the impugned judgment/order

dated 04.04.2019 passed by learned District Judge, Ajmer

(2 of 3) [CW-8227/2019]

whereby the application of the petitioner under Section 65 of the

Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

the respondent had filed a civil suit against the petitioner and

others in which petitioner had filed the written statement and he

had also filed a copy of the authority letter. Petitioner had filed an

application under Section 65 of Evidence Act for taking the said

authority letter on record but learned trial court vide order dated

04.04.2019 dismissed the application filed by the petitioner and

observed that the said authority letter was not filed in the reply.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the

petitioner had filed the said documents with the reply. So, order of

the learned trial Court be set-aside.

Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the

arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and

submitted that the learned trial Court rightly observed that the

said documents were not filed with the written statement. Learned

counsel for the respondents has further submitted that the said

original documents were filed in another suit in which learned trial

Court had not allowed the said documents to be taken on record.

So, copy of the documents cannot be taken on record.

Learned counsel for the respondents has placed

reliance upon the following judgments:-(1) Dropadi & Others

Vs. Mahagrah Bhagwat Singh & Others reported in AIR 1995

Rajasthan 138; (2) Sawa Vs. Kuka reported in 1951 RLW 80;

(3) Poonamchand Vs. Motilal & Others reported in AIR 1955

Rajasthan 179; (4) Gordhan Lal Agarwal Vs. Mali Ram Modi

& Anr. reported in 2013(1) DNJ (Raj.) 451; (5) Banshilal Vs.

Gauri Lal & Ors. reported in 2015 (4) WLN 159; (6) Shiolasing

(3 of 3) [CW-8227/2019]

Gannusing Rajput Vs. Shankar Motiram Nale reported in AIR

1984 Bombay 19 (7) Bhaskar Sahu Vs. Anama Swara & Ors.

reported in AIR 1987 Orrisa 138 (DB).

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned

counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the

respondents.

It is an admitted position that copy of the authority

letter was filed with the written statement. So, in my considered

opinion, learned trial court wrongly disallowed the application filed

by the petitioner under Section 65 of Indian Evidence Act. So,

petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be allowed.

Petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and order of

the learned trial Court is set-aside and authority letter filed by the

petitioner is taken on record.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Gourav/13

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)