Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rajesh Pratap Singh Sengar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 September, 2015

              Writ Petition No.5773/2014
              Rajesh Pratap Singh Sengar
                           vs.
                  State of MP & Ors.
                           1

09.09.2015
        Shri P.C. Chandil, Advocate for the petitioner.
        Shri Kamal Jain, Deputy Govt. Advocate for
respondent No.1/State.

Shri S.S.Gautam, Advocate for respondent No.2. None for respondent No.3 despite service. With the consent of parties, matter is finally heard.

The admitted facts are that the petitioner earlier filed W.P.No.3851/2013 before this Court which was decided on 19.06.2013. The said writ petition was filed against the order of court below dated 10.05.2013, whereby petitioner's application for taking document on record was rejected. This Court disposed of the petition with the observation that the petitioner can very well file an application before the court below for summoning the concerned employee of Municipal Corporation as witness along with the relevant record and copy of document. In turn, petitioner filed application under Order 16 Rule 6 CPC on 25.06.2013. He prayed that the certificate dated Writ Petition No.5773/2014 Rajesh Pratap Singh Sengar vs. State of MP & Ors.

2

15.11.1994 along with record be summoned. The court below allowed the said application on 16.08.2013 (Annexure P/8). In the meantime, on 10.07.2013, the Corporation filed the application Annexure P/9. It was prayed that upon enquiry from Revenue Department, it is found that no record relating to certificate is available. The certificate does not contain any dispatch number etc. Hence, record is not available. The court below accepted the said version by impugned order dated 05.09.2014 and posted the matter for plaintiff's evidence. This order has given rise to this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.

I find substance in the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that application Annexure P/9 is not supported by any affidavit. Nobody has taken responsibility about the facts narrated in Annexure P/9. The said application must be supported by an affidavit.

Writ Petition No.5773/2014

Rajesh Pratap Singh Sengar vs. State of MP & Ors.

3

Resultantly, the order dated 05.09.2014 is set aside. The respondent Corporation is directed to file application supported by affidavit within 15 days before the court below. The court below, in turn, shall consider and decide the said application in accordance with law.

Petition is disposed of without expressing any view on the merits of the case.



                                                  (Sujoy Paul)
(alok)                                               Judge