Kamal Kumar vs Bajrang Lal And Ors

The present writ petition emanates from the order dated 29.04.2019, passed by the learned Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Ladnu, District Nagaur (hereinafter referred to as "the Trial Court"), whereby the application filed by the plaintiffs under Order VII Rule 14(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure has been allowed.

The brief facts, which are relevant for the present purposes are that the plaintiffs (respondents No.1 and 2 herein) filed a suit for recovery of possession and mesne profit against the present petitioner alleging him to be a tenant in their premises.

After completion of plaintiffs' evidence, when the matter was at the stage of defendants' evidence, an application dated 14.01.2019, came to be filed by the plaintiffs under Order VII Rule 14(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking leave to produce certain documents such as agreement for lease dated 26.09.1992, application under Sections 19 (A) and 19 (C) of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 and copy of order dated 22.08.2007 etc. mentioned in the application.

The petitioner-defendant opposed the grant of leave to produce these documents, interalia, contending that leave cannot be granted at such a belated stage, particularly when the plaintiffs' evidence was over and that also because the documents in question were not relevant.

Learned Trial Court allowed the application so filed by the plaintiffs-respondents No.1 and 2, interalia, observing that at the time of completion of plaintiffs' evidence, right to produce rebuttal evidence was kept reserved and, therefore, the plaintiffs were entitled to file additional documents for rebuttal evidence or to confront the defendant. The learned Trial Court has further observed that the documents in question are necessary for proper adjudication of the issue and the lis pending before it.

In considered opinion of this Court, since, the Trial Court has exercised its discretion and allowed the subject application dated 14.01.2019, this Court would be slow in interfering in such order. The order impugned neither suffers from any jurisdictional error nor is there any error apparent, requiring exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as held by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in Shalini Shyam Shetty & Ors. Vs. Rajendra Shankar Patil, reported in (2010) 8CC 329 and Surya Dev Rai Vs. Ram Chander Rai & Ors., reported in 2003(6) SCC 675.

Hence, the writ petition is dismissed.

The Stay Petition No.11814/2019 also stands dismissed.