Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Punjab-Haryana High Court

St Sophia Education Society vs Manoj Kumar Karwasra on 1 December, 2014

                     CR No.7666 of 2014                                              -1-



                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
                                          CHANDIGARH


                                                           CM-26235-CII-2014 in/and
                                                           CR No.7666 of 2014 (O&M).
                                                           Decided on:-1.12.2014.


                     St. Sophia Education Society (Regd.).                    .........Petitioner.

                                                    Versus

                     Manoj Kumar Karwasra.                                    .........Respondent.


                     CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON.


                     Present:-   Mr. Jitendra Sharma, Advocate
                                 for the petitioner.

                     Dr. Bharat Bhushan Parsoon, J (Oral)

CM-26235-CII-2014 There is an application for placing on record copy of resolution dated 5.8.2012 (Annexure P-4) and also for exemption from filing certified copy thereof.

2. In view of the circumstances explained therein, the application is allowed and the document Annexure P-4 is taken on record.

Main Case

3. No notice to the opposite side is being issued to avoid delay and further because no prejudice would be caused to the other party.

4. Suit for recovery of Rs.1,40,694/- was filed by St. Sophia Education Society (Regd.). Copy of the plaint (Annexure P-2) reveals that resolution by the plaintiff-society was passed in this behalf, copy of which now on the paper book is Annexure P-4. As the said resolution could not be produced earlier due to inadvertence, the same was sought to be produced in evidence by way of an application for additional evidence which was rejected vide impugned order dated 14.10.2014 (Annexure P-1). It is not going to fill in lacuna as the trial court has mentioned it. In fact, this evidence is beyond manipulation and mention thereof is already there in the plaint. Merely because the counsel for the plaintiff had inadvertently not produced this document in evidence, the plaintiff-society cannot be prejudiced in its cause. Rather, it is held that this evidence is of essential nature and is required for proper, complete, effective and competent adjudication of the matter.

5. Notwithstanding the fact of provision of Order XVIII Rule 17-A CPC not being there on the statute book, the application still would be entertainable under Section 151 CPC and particularly in view of Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC when the Court itself is of the view that additional evidence is sought to be produced is of such nature which is necessary for effective and complete adjudication of the matter in controversy.

6. Sequelly, setting aside the impugned order, the application of the plaintiff-society for producing document Annexure P-4 in additional evidence is allowed. However, only one opportunity will be given by the court below for completion of additional evidence. Since the application was made belatedly, costs of Rs.5,000/- is imposed upon the plaintiff-society to be paid to the opposite side.

7. Disposed of in these terms.

8. Copy of order be given Dasti on usual charges.

(Dr. Bharat Bhushan Parsoon) Judge December 01, 2014 'Yag Dutt'

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes YAG DUTT 2014.12.05 14:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document