Civil Revision No. 7055 of 2011 --1-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 7055 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision. 17.11.2011 Labh Singh .... Petitioner Versus Harnek Singh and another ...... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK Present: Mr. V.K. Shukla, Advocate for the petitioner. **** Vijender Singh Malik, J. This is a revision petition brought by the plaintiff under the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 29.09.2011 (Annexure P-5) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jagraon, District Ludhiana, whereby his application under section 151 CPC for returning documents exhibited as Ex.D-4 to Ex.D-7 by respondents has been dismissed. Labh Singh, petitioner has filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining defendants no. 2 to 4 from releasing an electric connection in the name of respondent no.1 alone. In the said suit, documents Ex.D-4 to Ex.D-7 have been introduced in the evidence by the Civil Revision No. 7055 of 2011 --2-- defendants. The plaintiff had sought by way of the application filed under section 151 CPC return of those documents. The reason for this prayer is that these documents were not relied upon by the defendants and they have not been proved properly. It is also averred that the defendants are not the authors of those documents. Taking reply to the application where the application was claimed to be not maintainable, learned trial court heard learned counsel for the parties and dismissed the same vide the impugned order. I have heard Shri V.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record. Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the grounds taken for seeking relief against the impugned order. I do not find any merit in the same. If as contended by learned counsel for the petitioner, documents Ex.D-4 to D-7 are not properly proved on the record or they are not even relied upon by the defendants, these documents could be kept out of consideration by the court while deciding the suit. So, these submissions can be made before learned trial court and if they would satisfy the court, the court could exclude those documents from consideration. There was no stage for filing application for returning those documents. A document which has come in evidence has to be taken into consideration. However, the documents could not be thrown out for the only reason that they had not been relied upon. The rule regarding placing reliance is a rule of procedure and it cannot be used to exclude Civil Revision No. 7055 of 2011 --3-- some evidence from consideration if the same is relevant to the point in controversy and is otherwise proved on record. With the above said observations, I find no merit in the revision petition and dismiss the same. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to take such plea before the trial court while arguing the case. 17.11.2011 (VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) dinesh JUDGE