AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioners are aggrieved of order dated 19.01.2010 by which the application for producing documents has been partly allowed.Â
The petitioners are defendants in Title Suit No.210 of 1997. During pendency of the suit, an application was filed for marking as many as 12
documents in the suit. Plea taken by the defendants is that one of the defendants namely, Jagdeo Mahra is 90 years old; he has fought several civil
and criminal cases and on account of his old age and fading memory those documents could not be produced during the trial.
Order VIII Rule 1-A CPC provides that a document on which claim of the defendant is founded shall be produced along with the written
statement. Sub-rule(3) to Rule 1-A to Order VIII CPC, however, provides that a document which ought to have been produced, but not produced,
shall not be produced without leave of the Court. The trial Judge by an order dated 19.01.2010 has allowed the application dated 04.11.2009 to the
extent that the public documents in the list of documents shall be taken on record. It is not the case pleaded by the petitioners that they have laid
sufficient foundation in their written statement for producing other documents.
In the above facts, finding no infirmity in the impugned order dated 19.01.2010, the writ petition is dismissed.         Â