Sikkim High Court
Chandu Sherpa And Ors vs Sunita Rai And Ano on 21 June, 2024
Author: Bhaskar Raj Pradhan
Bench: Bhaskar Raj Pradhan
THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM: GANGTOK
(Civil Extraordinary Jurisdiction)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SINGLE BENCH: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN, JUDGE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W.P. (C) No.16 of 2024
W.P. (C) No.17 of 2024
W.P. (C) No.18 of 2024
&
W.P. (C) No.19 of 2024
1. Shri Chandu Sherpa,
S/o Lt. Lakey Sherpa,
Aged about 48 years,
Resident of 3rd Mile Bojoghari,
Gangtok, East District, Sikkim
Pin Code: 737 101.
2. Ms. Lhamu Sherpa,
Daughter of Lt. Lakey Sherpa,
Aged about 29 years,
Resident of 3rd Mile Bojoghari,
Gangtok, East District, Sikkim
Pin Code: 737 101.
3. Ms. Dawa Lhamu Sherpa,
Daughter of Lt. Lakey Sherpa,
Aged about 25 years,
Resident of 3rd Mile Bojoghari,
Gangtok, East District, Sikkim
Pin Code: 737 101.
4. Smt. Phul Maya Sherpa,
Wife of Lt. Lakey Sherpa,
Aged about 55 years,
Resident of 3rd Mile Bojoghari,
Gangtok, East District, Sikkim
Pin Code: 737 101.
..... Petitioners
Versus
1. Smt. Sunita Rai,
W/o Shri Dhan Bahadur Rai,
Resident of 3rd Mile Bojoghari,
Gangtok, East District, Sikkim
Pin Code: 737 101.
2
W.P. (C) Nos. 16/17/18/& 19 of 2024
Chandu Sherpa & Ors. vs. Sunita Rai & Anr.
2. District Collector-cum-Registrar,
Office of the District Collectorate,
District Administrative Centre,
Sichey, Gangtok, East Sikkim.
Pin Code: 737 101.
..... Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance:
Mr. Dewen Sharma Luitel and Mr. Bhaichung Bhutia,
Advocates for the Petitioners.
None for Respondent No.1
Mr. S. K. Chettri, Government Advocate for the
Respondent No.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of hearing : 21.06.2024
Date of Order : 21.06.2024
ORDER (ORAL)
Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J.
1 These four writ petitions raises identical
questions. Applications under Order VII Rule 14(3) read
with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC)
were moved by the petitioners in pending trials for
production of the affidavit in evidence of the respondent
no.1's son in another trial. The applications were rejected
by the impugned orders.
2. Order VII Rule 14 (3) CPC is very clear. The
documents sought to be produced by the parties must be
those documents which they seek to sue or rely upon.
W.P. (C) Nos. 16/17/18/& 19 of 2024
Chandu Sherpa & Ors. vs. Sunita Rai & Anr.
3. Admittedly, the necessary pleading is not
available in the plaints with regard to the affidavit in
evidence or the contents thereof. The learned counsel for
the petitioners submits that he filed the present writ
petitions as it was felt that he could not use this evidence
on affidavit during the trial of the present case. However, it
is submitted that he has now read the judgment of the
Supreme Court in Mohd. Abdul Wahid vs. Nilofer & Anr.1
and is satisfied that he could use the evidence on affidavit
during the course of the cross-examination of the
respondent no.1 which is yet to begin as the defendants
have only filed the evidence on affidavit at this stage. He
seeks to cross examine the respondent no.1 on all matters
including evidence on affidavit of the son of the respondent
no.1. Accordingly, the petitioners desires to withdraw the
writ petitions which is allowed with liberty to cross examine
the respondent no.1 on all matters as is permissible under
the law including putting the evidence on affidavit of the
respondent no.1's son to the respondent no.1.
1 (2024) 2 SCC 144
W.P. (C) Nos. 16/17/18/& 19 of 2024
Chandu Sherpa & Ors. vs. Sunita Rai & Anr.
4. All four writ petitions stands disposed of
accordingly.
( Bhaskar Raj Pradhan )
Judge
Approved for reporting : Yes
Internet : Yes
to/
