- (1.) By way of this writ petition, the Petitioner M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited has beseeched to quash and set-aside the order dated 22.1.2010, whereby the learned Additional District Judge No. 8, Jaipur City, Jaipur allowed the application of Respondent filed under Order 11 Rule 14 Code of Civil Procedure and permitted him to summon all the documents contained in the list annexed thereto.
(2.) Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner as also the Respondent in person and perused the relevant material on record.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner canvassed that in a suit for specific performance of contract, recovery of dues and submission of accounts filed by the Respondent, the Respondent-Plaintiff filed an application under Order 11 Rule 1, 5, 12 and 15 of Code of Civil Procedure on 26.9.2006; the interrogatories filed under Order 11 Rule 4 Code of Civil Procedure on 29.9.2006; and another application under Order 11 Rule 12 of Code of Civil Procedure also on the same day. The Petitioner filed detailed reply to the said applications and having heard both the parties, the learned trial Court dismissed both the aforesaid applications and interrogatories vide order dated 3.5.2007. Thereafter the Plaintiff filed a review application on 25.8.2007 and the same also stood dismissed on 23.10.2007. Learned Counsel further canvassed that after expiry of the period of 26 months, the Plaintiff again filed another application under Order 11 Rule 14 read with Rule 16 read with Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure on 19.1.2010 stating that earlier order dated 3.5.2007 was inconsistent with the provisions of Rule 5, 6 and 7 of Order 11, imploring the Court to direct the Petitioner-Defendant to produce the entire original personal and accounting record relating to the Plaintiff since his appointment to his dismissal. Learned trial Court allowed the aforesaid application on 22.1.2010 directing the Respondent-Plaintiff to file a list of required documents within a period of three days and further directed the Petitioner-Defendant Corporation to submit the documents contained in the list filed by the Plaintiff. Learned Counsel vehemently contended that once the application filed under Order 11 Rule 1, 5, 12 and 15 of Code of Civil Procedure and application filed under Order 11 Rule 12 of Code of Civil Procedure were dismissed and the review application was also dismissed, then the Respondent-Plaintiff had no right to re-agitate the same issue before the Court and the learned trial Court had no jurisdiction to allow the application on the same facts, which was totally contrary to the earlier order dated 3.5.2007. Hence, the impugned order being totally contrary to law deserves to be set aside. He has cited the following judgments in support thereof: (i) C.V. Rajendra and Anr. v. N.M. Muhammed Kunhi, 2003 AIR(SC) 649 (ii) Satyadhyan Ghosal and Ors. v. Smt. Deorajin Debi and Anr., 1960 AIR(SC) 941 (iii) Ishwar Dutt v. Land Acquisition Collector and Anr., 2005 7 SCC 190;