1 WP 6478.2011 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6478 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders Mr. D.P.Palodkar, Advocate for the Petitioner. ............................... CORAM :S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE :29/08/2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard Mr. D.P. Palodkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The present petitioner is the original defendant no. 1. The present respondent no. 1 had filed Suit for specific performance of contract. The plaintiff led her Examination-in-Chief. Along with the Examination-in- Chief, the documents were filed. Thereafter, the present petitioner/original defendant no. 1 started cross examination and in the midst of the cross examination, the plaintiff requested the Court to exhibit the documents and the trial Court had taken up the exercise of exhibiting the documents. The present petitioner raised objection to the same. The trial Court rejected the said objection. 2 WP 6478.2011 Aggrieved thereby, the present Writ Petition is filed. 3. Mr. Palodkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the documents have to be proved by the plaintiff and the same can be exhibited thereafter. In the present case, after the plaintiff led her Examination-in- Chief, the Court did not exhibit the documents and the petitioner started cross examination and in the midst of the cross examination, the Court considered the request of the plaintiff to exhibit the documents. Such a procedure is not permissible in law. The Court could not have exhibited the document after the petitioner had started cross examination. According to the learned counsel, such a procedure is not contemplated under any of the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure [ For short, ‘ the Code ’ ]. 4. The Court has to exhibit the documents as per the rules enumerated in Order XIII of the Code. In fact, if the document is produced and tendered in evidence and if it satisfies the rules enshrined under Order XIII of the Code, then it is the duty of the Court to admit the document in evidence. It is for the Court either to admit or reject the document. If the document is admitted in evidence and if it satisfies all the requirements for exhibiting the same, then it is the duty of the Court to exhibit the same. It is not that only after the party makes a request to exhibit the document, the Court has to exhibit the same. In the present case, it seems that the Examination-in-Chief was 3 WP 6478.2011 led and the documents were already on record at the time of Examination-in-Chief or along with the Examination-in- Chief, it was for the Court either to exhibit the document if the said document satisfies all the ingredients or to reject it. The said exercise was not done by the Court and so during the midst of the cross examination, the Court had taken up the said task on the request of plaintiff. The procedural law has to be in aid to sub-serve the cause of substantial justice. 5. More over, the objection was not raised on the count that the documents can not be exhibited as they were not proved or it suffers from any other legal defect. If such an objection is raised, the Court can consider the said objection on its own merits. But, in the present case, as the objection was only to the procedure that the documents were sought to be exhibited during the midst of the cross examination, the Court below was right in negativing the said objection. 6. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed with aforesaid observations. No costs. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] KNP/WP 6478.2011 4 WP 6478.2011