- (1.) THIS revision arises out of an order dated 8-1-1988 passed by Additional Senior Sub-Judge, Forozepore, declining to summon the files for cross-examination of the witnesses of the plaintiff bank. It is not disputed at the Bar in she course of the arguments that the back does maintain proper file with respect to the correspondence between the bank and the firm described as M/s Bharat Bones and Fertilizer Mills, Sodhiwala Road, Talwandi Bhai Tahsil and District Ferozepore, in respect of cash credit limit and medium term loan (M. T. L.) including other correspondence which was exchanged between the plaintiff bank and the defendant i. e. (i) correspondence received by the plaintiff from the defendant : (ii) Filefrom the Regional Manager Local Head office, State Bank of India, Sector 17. Chandigarh relating to the correspondence between the plaintiff-bank and Kirpal Sirgh, Partner, which contains all recommendations of the Regional Manager to the Technical Officer for studying the nursing of the sick unit.
(2.) THE only ground on which the application has been dismissed is that details of the record have not been given and the bank cannot be asked to produce the record.
(3.) THE application was read out by the counsel for parties in Court. I have gone through the same. The order of the trial Court cannot be sustained. The application specifically states the files admittedly maintained by the bank with respect to the correspondence between the parties and recommendations made by the bank, if there is any with respect to the sick units. The bank also was at liberty to produce only the original documents i. e. the letter received by them from the parties. The bank would not be bound to produce the copies of the letter addressed by the bank in reply to the letters addressed by the defendant to the bank. The bank would also be liable to produce the file relating to the recommendations with respect to the sick unit. The said record shall be produced for the cross examination of the witnesses produced by the bank. The witnesses have already been examined for whose cross-examination the record was required. They will be recalled for cross-examination,;