1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER Rameswar Dayal & Ors. Vs. Ramchandra & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6012/2010) Date of Order :- April 28, 2010 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.CHAUHAN Mr.Vipul Jain, for the petitioners. Aggrieved by the order dated 05.02.2010, passed by the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) & Judicial Magistrate, No.3, Alwar, whereby the learned Judge has dismissed the application under Order 11 Rule 12 read with Rule 14 CPC filed by the petitioners, the petitioners have approached this Court. Mr. Vipul Jain, the learned counsel for the petitioners, has contended that the learned Judge is unjustified in claiming that the petitioners had vaguely asked for certain documents under Order 11 Rule 12 read with Rule 14 CPC. Therefore, the said order dated 05.02.2010 deserved to be set aside. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the impugned order as well as the application filed by the petitioners before the learned trial court. A bare perusal of the application filed by the petitioners reveals that they had asked as under : 2 अतः ौीमान को ूाथ[ना पऽ पेश करके िनवेदन है Ǒक जवाब दावे के पेरा नàबर तीन मे वǔण[त सàपǒƣयां व वादȣगण Ʈारा बताये गये संयुƠ पǐरवार के तहत वाद के दौरान जो भी सàपǒƣयां वादȣगण Ʈारा खरȣद कȧ गई व ठेकेजात एफ.सी.आई (भारतीय खाƭ िनगम) कȧ पूंजी व उससे अǔज[त आय का भी ǒवभाजन हेतु समःत ǒववरण पेश करे । Since the petitioners had failed to specify the exact nature of the documents that had to be produced and had made a vague statement that “all the documents relating to the income should be produced”, the learned Judge is certainly justified in holding that a vague application has been filed. In this view of the matter, there is neither any perversity, nor any illegality in the impugned order. Thus, this petition is devoid of any merit. It is, hereby, dismissed. (R.S.CHAUHAN)J. Manoj Solanki-