Dr. V.P. Sharma vs Manu Khanna

Vikramajit Sen, J.—This Appeal is directed against the Order dated 19.7.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge refusing to grant Leave to place on record certain additional documents holding the same to have been filed after inordinate delay.

The dispute pertains to partition of the property bearing No. C-18, Shivalik, New Delhi which is in the joint possession of the Appellant/Defendant, and the Respondent/Plaintiff and his mother through whom the subject Suit has been filed.

One of the Issues struck in the Suit reads as follows:

Whether the Defendant purchased the ground floor of property bearing municipal No. C-18, Shivalik, New Delhi with funds made available by Shri Room Ram, father of the Defendant and grandfather of the Plaintiff. If yes, to what effect? OPP

The Division Bench of this Court, vide Order dated 18.1.2008, granted liberty to the Respondent/Plaintiff as well as Defendant to adduce evidence in Trial to substantiate his (their?) stand with regard to the ownership of the Ground Floor and as to from where the funds had come to purchase the same. The Appellant/Defendant, to the extent the Plaintiff would adduce his evidence on the said Issue, was liable to be cross-examined as well.

Pursuant to this liberty granted by the Division Bench, the Respondent filed his additional Affidavit on 17.3.2008 through his mother. The Appellant, however, filed an Application bearing IA No. 3419/2010 on 12 (17?).3.2010 seeking to bring on record some original documents allegedly in response to the additional Affidavit filed by the mother of the Plaintiff.

We have gone through the list of the additional documents which are sought to be brought on record, and we agree with the learned Single Judge that they appear to have been in the possession of the Appellant all along, and could have been filed earlier as well. The Appellant has also failed to explain why the said application to file these additional documents was filed so belatedly. Since the Trial is proceeding, allowing the Appellant to bring these documents is only going to unnecessarily prolong the Trial to the detriment of the Respondent.

The Orders of the Coordinate Bench, on which reliance is placed for the liberty to file additional documents, also records that the Bench, vide Order dated 7.5.2007, had expedited the hearing of Suit as it was noted that the Suit had not made much progress because of filing of application after application in the Suit. We see the present Application as another attempt towards the same end. The discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge does not seem to us to be perverse or arbitrary in any respect. On the contrary, we find the learned Single Judge to be perfectly justified in dismissing the Appellant''s Application.

No ground for interference made out. Appeal is dismissed. CM No. 16398/2010 is also dismissed.