Raja Jithender Rao And Another vs Nakki Siddappa
2021 Latest Caselaw 1865 Tel

       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

                 C.R.P.Nos.297, 301 and 340 of 2021

COMMON ORDER:

      These three Civil Revision Petitions are filed against the

orders dated 05.01.2021, passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge,

Narayanpet, in I.A.No.391 of 2019 in O.S.No.79 of 2012,

I.A.No.392/A of 2019 in O.S.No.79 of 2012, and I.A.No.392 of 2019 in

O.S.No.79 of 2012, respectively.

      The   petitioners/plaintiffs   filed   the   suit   against   the

respondent/defendant seeking perpetual injunction. Pending the

said suit, the respondent/defendant filed I.A.No.391 of 2019 under

Order XVIII Rule 17 r/w Section 151 C.P.C. to recall the chief

examination of DW1 for the purpose of marking judgment copy

passed in O.S.No.23 of 2013, dated 12.07.2019; I.A.No.392 of 2019

under Section 151 C.P.C to reopen the case for further chief

examination of the defendant for marking judgment copy passed in

O.S.No.23 of 2013, dated 12.07.2019; and I.A.No.392/A of 2019 under

Order VIII 1A [3] r/w Section 151 C.P.C to receive the certified copy

of the judgment passed in O.S.No.23 of 2013, dated 12.07.2019. The

Court below, after hearing both sides and perusing the record, by

the impugned orders dated 05.01.2021, has allowed the said

Interlocutory Applications.

Heard Sri Mohd. Adnan, the learned counsel for the

petitioners/plaintiffs and Sri Bajrang Singh Thakur, the learned

counsel for the respondent/defendant. Perused the record.

A perusal of the impugned orders shows that the Court

below, while allowing the Interlocutory Applications, has observed

that mere marking of document is not proof of its contents, and the

burden of proving the contents of the document lies on the party

seeking to mark the document and that the document received does

not cause any prejudice to the other side and they reserved their

right to cross examine the witnesses about the said document.

Admittedly, the document, if any, received by the Court

below shall always be subject to proof and relevancy. Even if the

document is taken on record and marked as evidence, the

petitioners have the opportunity to cross-examine the recalled

witness with regard to the relevancy of the said document to the

present suit. Even otherwise, the petitioners have ample

opportunity to raise all contentions with regard to the relevancy or

otherwise of the said document during the course of arguments. As

no prejudice would be caused to the petitioners by merely receiving

and marking of the documents, the discretion exercised by the Court

below cannot be said to be contrary to law or perverse, and

therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned

orders.

The Civil Revision Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand

dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

________________________ A.ABHISHEK REDDY, J Date: 29.06.2021 va