AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J.
This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode.
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, assailing the order dated 05th April, 2018, passed by the trial court in Civil Suit No. 93446/16, whereby the application filed under Order VII Rule 14, seeking permission to place certain documents on record, has been dismissed.
Heard. Record perused.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that the documents sought to be placed on record are relevant for the proper adjudication of the case. These documents could not be filed earlier due to the negligence of the previous counsel and the erstwhile Authorized Representative of the petitioner company.
Per contra, learned Counsel for the respondent has argued that the application has been filed only with a view to delay the proceedings, in as much as the suit was instituted more than six years prior to the filing of the said application. It is contended that there is no infirmity in the impugned order.
It is, however, not disputed that although the issues have already been framed, the evidence is yet to be recorded in the case. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the suit, and the documents sought to be placed on record as detailed in Paragraph no. 2 of the application, this Court is of the opinion that the said documents could be taken on record, subject to payment of costs, as the respondent can be compensated with costs.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the documents as sought by the petitioner in the application be brought on record, subject to payment of costs of Rs. 10,000/- to the respondent.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of in the above terms. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.