RAMESH CHANDRA Vs. ADDITIONAL DIST JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, the defendants have challenged the order dtd.7.8.2006 whereby the learned trial Court held that the issue as to the admissibility of the document in question, namely, the agreement on which respondents - plaintiffs had based their suit for specific performance, will be decided at the time of final hearing of the suit.

(2.) The defendants - petitioners have challenged the said order on the ground that the question of admissibility of evidence could riot be postponed and deferred to be decided at the time of final hearing of the suit itself and such question was required to be decided forthwith by the learned trial Court.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners- defendants Dr. Sachin Acharya, relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of R.V.E. Venkatachala Gounder v. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami and V.P. Temple and anr. reported in (2003) 8 SCC 752 :(AIR 2003 SC 4548) and later decision of this Court in the case of LRs. of late Sh. Chittar Mal v. Addl. Civil Judge (SD) and ors. reported in 2005(1) DNJ (Raj.) 366 submitted that it was not the objection of the defendants as to only mode of proof of said document, namely, agreement in question, but objection was as to the admissibility of the evidence itself and therefore, the learned trial Court has fallen into error in postponing the decision on the said objection until final arguments of the suit itself. He submitted that reliance placed by the learned trial Court on the case of Jogindero Devi v. Gurjan Singh reported in 2006 (1) RRT 258 is misplaced and in the said judgment, reliance upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bipin Shantilal Panchal v. State of Gujarat reported in 2001 (1) RLW (SC) 169 : (AIR 2001 SC 1158) is also misplaced because in the case of Bipin Shanti Lal Panchal (supra) as quoted by the learned Single Judge in the aforesaid decision in the case of Jogindera Devi (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that objection about the admissibility of the document can be raised at the time of cross-examination and such objection is required to be decided forthwith.