Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 218 (RAJ)

Banshi Lal v. LR's of Bagta Ram

2016-02-05

ARUN BHANSALI

body2016
ORDER : Arun Bhansali, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against order dated 16.09.2015 passed by the trial court, whereby the application under Order 11, Rule 14 CPC filed by the respondent-plaintiff has been accepted. 2. The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction based on patta of the land in question in his favour. The suit was resisted by the petitioner and he also claimed a patta in his favour. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff filed application under Order 11, Rule 14 CPC for summoning the record from the Gram Panchyat. The application was opposed by the petitioner, inter alia, indicating that either the plaintiff could have obtained certified copies of the record sought to be produced and/or the certified copies of the documents are already on record and, therefore, the application deserves to be dismissed. 3. The trial court after hearing the parties came to the conclusion that the documents sought to be summoned were relevant, would advance the cause of justice and would not prejudice the case of the defendants and accepted the application. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the submissions as made before the trial court by pleading that the certified copies of the documents were already on record and/or the plaintiff could obtain their certified copies and place the same. The application was filed only with a view to delay the proceedings and, therefore, the trial court was not justified in accepting the application filed by the plaintiff. 5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the material available on record. 6. A perusal of the order passed by the trial court clearly indicates that the trial court, after considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and analysing the same, came to the conclusion that not only the documents were relevant, the summoning of the said documents would advance the cause of justice and would not prejudice petitioner's defence. Once the finding in this regard has been recorded by the trial court, no case for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is made out in the present writ petition. 7. The same, is, therefore, dismissed.