// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5672/2004 Durga Pal Singh S/o Shri Niranjan Singh and Others Versus Civil Judge (Junior Division) & Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Deeg, District Bharatpur and Another Date of Order ::: 29.04.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Rajendra Prasad, Counsel for petitioners None present for the respondents #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. The plaintiff-respondent No.2 filed a suit for permanent injunction in respect of disputed land in the trial court in the year 1999, wherein the defendants filed their written-statement on 1st December, 1999. The issues were framed and the case was fixed for plaintiff's evidence. The plaintiff examined his witnesses – Nand Ram, Soran, Devi Ram and Dan Singh. When the matter was pending for plaintiff's evidence itself, the defendants filed an application on 21st October, 2003 placing some documents on the record, which are said to be public documents. The application was contested by the plaintiff. The trial court, after hearing the arguments of both the sides, dismissed the application vide impugned order dated 13th May, 2004, which has been challenged by the defendants in this writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that // 2 // the matter was fixed before the trial court for plaintiff's evidence itself and at that stage an application was moved under Order 8 Rule 1 CPC along-with copy of 'Zamabandi' and compromise for taking them on the record, but the application has been dismissed only on the ground of delay in its filing, whereas the delay in filing the application should not have been made the basis for its rejection as the delay of proceedings could have been compensated by awarding costs. The trial court has not rejected the application on the ground that the documents are not relevant or material. He submits that the documents are necessary for proper adjudication of the suit, therefore, the impugned order be set-aside and the documents annexed with the application be taken on the record. A notice to show cause was given to the respondents on 19th August, 2004 and further proceedings of the trial court were also stayed. The said order is still operating. No one is present on behalf of the plaintiff-respondent in spite of service of notice. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners in the light of reasons assigned by the trial court for rejecting their application under Order 8 Rule 1 CPC for taking on record the above referred documents and, after considering the same, I find that the trial court committed an illegality in rejecting the application on the ground of delay only. So far as delay of proceedings is concerned, the same could have been compensated by awarding costs and the trial court has not assigned any reason about relevancy of the // 3 // documents. In case the documents were necessary for just decision of the case then the application ought to have been allowed and the documents should have been taken on the record. In view of the above discussions, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 13th May, 2004 passed by the trial court, is set-aside. The application filed by the defendants- petitioners dated 21st October, 2003 is allowed on costs of Rs.3,000/-, which will be paid by the petitioners to the plaintiff- respondent within a period of one month from today. It is made clear that in case the aforesaid amount of costs is not paid within the aforesaid time then it will be presumed that the application filed by the petitioner is dismissed and the documents will not be taken on the record and no further opportunity in this regard will be given to the petitioners. So far as this writ petition is concerned, the costs is made easy. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman// // 4 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.4866/2004 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5672/2004 Durga Pal Singh S/o Shri Niranjan Singh and Others Versus Civil Judge (Junior Division) & Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Deeg, District Bharatpur and Another Date of Order ::: 29.04.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Rajendra Prasad, Counsel for petitioners None present for the respondents #### By the Court:- In view of the order passed in the writ petition itself, the stay application also stands disposed of. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//