Chattisgarh High Court
Pradeep Singh vs Prashant Singh Thakur 38 Crr/294/2009 ... on 5 December, 2018
Author: Sanjay K. Agrawal
Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
W.P. (227) No. 1028 of 2018
Pradeep Singh S/o Late Birendra Bahadur Singh Rajput, Aged
About 40 Years Permanent R/o. B-14, Central Avenue, Smriti
Nagar, Junwani, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh At Present
R/o. D-19/6, K.A.P.S. Township, Post Anumala, Tahsil Vyara,
District Tapi (Gujrat), Gujarat ---- Petitioner/Plaintiff
Versus
1. Prashant Singh Thakur S/o Late Pramod Singh Aged About 22
Years R/o. B-14, Central Avenue Smriti Nagar, Junwani, Tahsil And
District Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
2. Smt. Mithlesh Singh, W/o Late Pramod Singh, Aged About 46
Years R/o. B-14, Central Avenue Smriti Nagar, Junwani, Tahsil And
District Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
3. Smt. Uma Thakur, W/o Late Vijay Singh Senger, Aged About 46
Years R/o. Village Mohgaon, Tahsil Saja, District Bemetara
Chhattisgarh., District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh
4. Smt. Prabha Thakur, W/o Shri Akhtar Hussain, Aged About 44
Years R/o. Qtr. No. 5 B, Street No. 24, Sector-1, Bhilai Nagar,
Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
5. Smt. Sheela Thakur, W/o Shri Baldau Singh Thakur, Aged About
42 Years R/o. B-15, Central Avenue, Smriti Nagar, Junwani, Tahsil
And District Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
6. Smt. Meera Thakur, W/o Shri Pramod Thakur, Aged About 38
Years R/o. Kila Ward, Infront Of Gupta Ata Chakki, Hatari Chowk,
Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District :
Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents/Defendants
For Petitioner : Mr. Praveen K. Dhurandhar, Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 05/12/18
1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the 2 application filed by the petitioner under Order 13 Rule 10 of CPC for production of documents on record has been rejected by the trial Court by impugned order dated 05.10.2018 against which this writ petition has been preferred.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is unsustainable and bad in law and is liable to be set aside.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order.
4. From careful perusal it is clear that plaintiff's evidence has already been closed and the defendants' evidence is in progress therefore, the direction for production of record would serve no purpose. As such, I do not find good ground to interfere with the impugned order.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition deserves to be and is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost(s).
6. A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court directly as well as through the concerned District Judge for information.
SD/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka