SBCWP NO.1978/2006 - GHANSHYAM MANTRI AND ANR. V/S CIVIL JUDGE (S.D.) AND ORS. AND ONE CONNECTED APEPAL :JUDGMENT DTD.10.9.2009 1/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. 1. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1978/2006 Ghanshyam Mantri and anr. Versus Civil Judge (Sr. Division) and ors. 2. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.107/2008 Ghanshyam Mantri and anr. Versus Civil Judge (Sr. Division) and ors. PRESENT HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.R.S.Choudhary,for the petitioner Mr.Pawan Ojha, for the respondent. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 10th September, 2009. JUDGMENT WRIT PETITION NO.1978/2006 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dtd.4.4.2006 whereby the learned trial Court impleaded one Satya Narayan as party defendant in the suit filed for injunction against the Municipal SBCWP NO.1978/2006 - GHANSHYAM MANTRI AND ANR. V/S CIVIL JUDGE (S.D.) AND ORS. AND ONE CONNECTED APEPAL :JUDGMENT DTD.10.9.2009 2/3 Council for not demolishing the latrine and bathroom constructed by the petitioner – plaintiff. 2. This Court vide order dtd.6.2.2007 consolidated the trial of cross suit filed by the newly added defendant Satya Narayan, namely, suit No.104/1993 and both the suits are pending in the same Court. In view of this, the plaintiff cannot take a valid objection to the impleadment of said defendant. Since cross suit filed by the said defendant is already pending in the same Court and both the trials are going on simultaneously, accordingly, there is no force in this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. WRIT PETITION NO.107/2008 3. In the aforesaid cross suit No.104/2003, the defendant had filed an application under Order 7 Rule 14 C.P.C. for taking on record additional documents at the stage of evidence of the plaintiff. 4. The learned trial Court has allowed the said application by the impugned order dtd.13.12.2007 though observing that the application filed by the plaintiff was absolutely laconic and did not even give description of the documents sought to be produced by him much less their relevancy and requirement of such documents to be taken on record. In view of this finding of the learned trial Court, this Court SBCWP NO.1978/2006 - GHANSHYAM MANTRI AND ANR. V/S CIVIL JUDGE (S.D.) AND ORS. AND ONE CONNECTED APEPAL :JUDGMENT DTD.10.9.2009 3/3 does not find any justification for allowing such application under Section 7 Rule 14 C.P.C. and taking those documents on record subject to payment of cost of Rs.500/-. 5. In view of aforesaid, this writ petition is alowed and the impugned order dtd.13.12.2007 under Order 7 Rule 14 C.P.C. allowing the application of the plaintiff is set aside. The trial Court shall proceed accordingly. No order as to costs. (Dr.VINEET KOTHARI)J. Item No.13 AND 14. Ss/-