- (1.) With the consent of the learned counsels for the parties the petition is heard finally at the admission stage.
(2.) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners-defendants Nos.2 & 3 under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 01.04.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge No.11, Jaipur Metropolitan (hereinafter referred to as "the trial court") in Civil Suit No.215/12, whereby the trial court has rejected the application of the petitioners filed under Order 8, Rule 1A of CPC, for taking certain documents on record.
(3.) The short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the respondent Nos.1 to 3-original plaintiffs have filed the suit against the present petitioners and the respondent No.4-original defendants Nos.1 to 3, seeking possession, permanent injunction and also rendition of accounts in respect of the suit property. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioners-defendants Nos.2 & 3 had filed an application under Order 16, Rule 6 of CPC to summon the officer-in-charge of the Police Station Shastri Nagar, Jaipur to produce certain documents like the original agreement to sell dated 25.11.1985, and one letter which documents were seized by the Police during the course of investigation in F.I.R. No.219/90, lodged by Mahaveer Singh, husband of the plaintiff No.2. The said application was dismissed by the trial court as per the order dated 12.05.2006. The writ petition as well as the special appeal preferred by the petitioners against the said order dated 12.05.2006, were also dismissed. The petitioners thereafter filed another application to lead secondary evidence with regard to the said documents, and the said application was also dismissed by the trial court vide its order dated 10.11.2006. The writ petition filed against the said order was also dismissed by the High Court. It appears that the said order passed in the writ petition was challenged before the Division Bench by way of special appeal in (writ petition No.330/2007), and the same was also dismissed on 15.03.2007. The petitioners challenged the said order before the Apex Court and following order was passed by the Apex Court on 01.10.2012:- "Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the documents have already been made available to the petitioners required under Section 65 of the Evidence Act. In the circumstances, no orders are required to be passed in this special leave petition. The same is accordingly disposed of.";