Decided on October 10,2003



K.S.Kumaran, - (1.)HEARD Counsel.
The appellants are aggrieved by the order dated 1.10.2003 passed in Application No. 4461/2003 by the learned Presiding Officer of the DRT, Chandigarh, whereby the learned Presiding Officer of the DRT disposed of the application filed by the appellants/defendants for holding that the documents filed by the respondent-Bank along with the rejoinder should not be taken on record. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants/defendants is that these documents were neither referred to in the O.A. nor filed along with the O.A., but were filed only with the rejoinder.

(2.)The learned Presiding Officer of the DRT has observed that he will not decide the admissibility of the documents into evidence at this stage, but he will do so at the time of the final decision. The learned Counsel for the appellant contends that if this point is to be decided at the time of final decision, it will be too late for the appellants to put forward their case regarding admissibility and relevancy.
In these circumstances, I am of the view that the appeal can he disposed of at this stage with a direction to the learned Presiding Officer of the DRT to consider the objection raised by the appellants with regard to the admissibility and relevancy of the documents without waiting for the stage when the final decision is made. It is made clear that the appellants may interpose the objection to the introduction of these documents into evidence either on the ground of relevancy or admissibility at the time when the documents are sought to be introduced into evidence. If and when such objection is raised, the learned Presiding Officer shall decide the same in accordance with law, at that time. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of.

(3.)COPY of this order be given to the appellants, be served upon the respondents, and also be forwarded to the DRT concerned.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.