Judgment : 1. The petitioner/defendant in O.S. No. 7406 of 2005 on the file of Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore City, is before this Court praying for quashing the order dated 1-2-2010 passed in the above said suit at Annexure-F. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filed an application on 1-2-2010 under Order 11, Rule 14 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 seeking direction to the respondent to produce the judgment passed by the City Civil Court, Bangalore, in a suit between the respondent herein and owner of the premises at Srirampuram. The Trial Court after hearing arguments on the application rejected the same on the ground that such an application was filed for the purpose of adjournment. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the Trial Court has misunderstood that the petitioner has sought to produce judgment in O.S. No. 5060 of 2007 and the file of City Civil Court, though the suit in O.S. No. 5060 of 2007 is still pending consideration and the same has been clubbed with O.S. No. 7406 of 2005. 3. There is no material placed on record to establish that the respondent is in possession of the judgment which is sought to be produced by the petitioner. When the respondent has not deposed that he is in possession of copy of the judgment, there was no good ground for the petitioner to file application under Order 11, Rule 14 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 to summon document. The Trial Court has rightly rejected the application. I see no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. 4. It is made clear that if the petitioner were to elicit during the course of cross-examination of the respondent/P.W. 1 that he is in possession of the document, there is no impediment for the petitioner to file appropriate application to summon the document, if the same is necessary, for proper and effective adjudication of the suit. In the result, the petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed with the observation as above.