AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Gurusharan Sharma, J.—In Money Suit No. 1 of 1994, plaintiff gave notice (Annexure 1) to the defendant under Order XII, Rule 8 of CPC for production of certain documents mentioned in Schedule ''A'' to the said notice. Defendant filed rejoinder (Annexure 2) thereto and by impugned order dated 21.8.1999 trial Court directed defendant to produce those documents.
A perusal of the said notice (Annexure 1) reveals that it could not have been treated as an application under Order XI, Rule 12 of the Civil Procedure Code, as the purpose or relevancy of such documents in relation to any matter in question. In the suit was not disclosed therein, and the impugned order can also not be treated to have been passed under Order XI, Rule 14 of CPC as the Court did not decide it as an application for discovery of documents.
A mistake on the part of the defendant was also committed when the said notice purporting to be under Order XII, Rule 8 was treated to be an application for discovery of documents under Order XI, Rule 12 of Civil Procedure Code.
In my opinion, trial Court committed an error of jurisdiction in passing the impugned order. This Revision application is, accordingly, allowed, and impugned order is set aside. The plaintiff shall be at liberty to take appropriate step in the suit, in accordance with law. Let the lower Court records be sent down to the Court below immediately.
Revision application allowed.