CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(1996) 07 KAR CK 0015

S. Venkatappa by LRs. vs D.N. Purushotham Rao

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 5 July 1996 · Citation: (1996) ILR (Kar) 3226 : (1996) 6 KarLJ 161

HON’BLE JUDGES
M.B. Vishwanath, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Regular Second Appeal No. 448/92

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 356 words

M.B. Vishwanath, J.—Heard both Counsel. The defendant is the appellant in this case. The plaintiff filed the suit O.S.No. 1275/1970 on the file of the II Additional First Munsiff, Bangalore, for recovery of Rs. 5,000/- with interest, against the defendant.

2.

The learned Munsiff, by his judgment dated 14.7.1975 decreed the suit. The defendant preferred the appeal R.A.No. 4/1986 on the file of the Principal City Civil Judge, Bangalore.

3.

The learned Civil Judge dismissed the appeal. The appellant-defendant has filed the present appeal.

3.

Both the Courts-below believed the evidence of the plaintiff-P.W.1 and the chit, Ex.P-9, in the suit. The chit Ex.P-9, on which both the Courts relied, was No. 1 admittedly filed by the plaintiff along with the plaint.

4.

It is contended in this Court by the Learned Counsel for the appellant-defendant that Ex.P-9 chit is the suit document and it should have been produced along with the plaint in view of Order 7 Rule 14 of the C.P.C. Order 7 Rule 14(1) of the C.P.C. says:-

"14(1). Where a plaintiff sues upon a document in his possession or power, he shall produce it in Court when the plaint is presented, and shall at the same time deliver the document or a copy thereof to be filed with the plaint."

It should be noted that Order 7 Rule 14(1) refers to a document on which the plaintiff ''sues''. It does not refer to a document on which the plaintiff relies. Order 7 Rules 14(1) refers to a suit document, a document on which the suit is based and not to a relevant document on which the plaintiff relies to prove his claim. It is abundantly clear from the plaint averments that the plaintiff did not base his suit claim on Ex.P-9. The plaintiff did not sue upon Ex.P-9. But he relied upon Ex.P-9 to prove his claim.

5.

For the aforesaid reasons, I am of opinion the Courts-below were not wrong in relying on Ex.P-9 chit, even though Ex.P-9 had not been produced along with the plaint.?

6.

The appeal is dismissed. Each party shall bear his own costs in this appeal.