IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 332 of 2010 Date of decision: 28.03.2011 Chatter Kala ... Petitioner Versus Chet Ram and another … Respondents Coram : The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. R.R. Rahi, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No. 1. V.K. Ahuja, J. (Oral): The petitioner as plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration to the effect that she is the legally wedded wife of defendant No. 1. The suit was contested by the respondents/defendants. The case had concluded and it was fixed for arguments when the present application under Order 7 Rule 14(3) read with Section 151 C.P.C. for production of two documents was filed by the plaintiff. The said application was dismissed by the learned trial Court and the petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the said order dated 4.8.2010. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case. 1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 3. It is clear from a perusal of the observations made by the learned trial Court as well as from the record that both these documents were never relied upon in the pleadings of the plaintiff/petitioner before the learned trial Court. Insofar as the second document is concerned, it has been mentioned that it was not in existence on the date and it is only a certificate issued by the Pradhan, which is sought to be proved. This is a private document and is not relevant and not required for deciding the dispute in between the parties. In regard to the first document i.e. agreement dated 13.10.1987 is concerned, no case was made out by the applicant in the pleadings by the plaintiff/petitioner and as to why the document could not be produced earlier and this document was never relied upon by the plaintiff in the pleadings filed before the learned trial Court. The learned trial Court has considered these facts and has passed the order, which does not suffer from any infirmity and as such, there is no merit in the petition filed by the petitioner, which is dismissed accordingly, so also the pending application(s), if any. Parties through their learned counsel are directed to put up appearance before the learned trial Court on 18th April, 2011, who shall proceed with the case and dispose of the case at the earliest. A copy of the judgment alongwith record be sent to the learned trial Court. ( V.K. Ahuja ), March 28, 2011 Judge (BSS) 3 4