THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.246 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner filed O.S.No.1296 of 2003 in the Court of XI Additional Senior Civil Judge, (F.T.C.), City Civil Court, Hyderabad against the respondents for the relief of dissolution of partnership firm and rendition of accounts. The trial of the suit is commenced and it is in progress. The petitioner filed I.A.No.66 of 2008 under Rule 16 of Order XI C.P.C with a prayer to direct the second respondent to produce the record relating to the first respondents firm. The second respondent opposed the application by stating that no partnership firm exists as such, much less, did he maintain any record. The trial Court dismissed the I.A., through order dated 24.11.2008. Heard Sri B. Chandrasen Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Khaja Mohiuddin, learned counsel for the second respondent. The suit has undergone several stages. At one point of time, the petitioner filed an application under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act with a prayer to receive Xerox copy of the unregistered partnership deed as secondary evidence. That application was dismissed and C.R.P.No.3030 of 2006 filed before this Court was also dismissed on 31.1.2007. The petitioner insisted that being the Managing Partner of the firm the second respondent is expected to have custody of the deed, as well as the books of accounts. It is no doubt true that Rule 16 of Order XI empowers the Court to direct a party to the suit to produce the documents. That however would be possible if there is no dispute as to the existence of documents. When the concerned party disputes the very existence of documents, the Court cannot direct production thereof. Therefore, no exception can be taken to the view expressed by the trial Court. In case, there exists any other evidence oral or documentary for the petitioner to prove the existence of firm, it shall always open for her to adduce the same. Hence the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to supplement her evidence as to proof of existence of partnership firm as well as the accounts thereof. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ (L. Narasimha Reddy, J.) 13th October, 2009 Js.