- (1.) HEARD the learned counsel Ms. Suruchi Kasliwal for the petitioners and learned counsel Mr. Bihari Lal Agarwal for the contesting respondent No.1. Rest of the respondents have not been served however they being formal, the petition is being disposed of after hearing the learned counsels for the petitioners and the respondent No.1 only.
(2.) THE present petition has been filed by the petitioners- defendants Nos.8 to 10 challenging the order dated 31.01.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge No.11 Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "the trial court") in Civil Suit No.15/2012 (50/2006), whereby the trial court has dismissed the application of the petitioners seeking production of documents i.e. lease deed dated 17.06.1995 on record under the provisions contained in Order VIII Rule 1A (3) of CPC. It has been submitted by the learned counsel Ms. Suruchi Kasliwal for the petitioners that the document in question sought to be produced by the petitioners was misplaced by them and could not be produced at the earlier stage, however the same was referred to by the plaintiff herself in the rejoinder to written statement. According to her, the said document is very relevant to prove that the deceased Chiranji Devi used to put her signature in English also. She further submitted that the petitioners be permitted to lead the evidence only with regard to the proof of the said document and that too on the date that may be fixed by the trial court.
(3.) HOWEVER the learned counsel Mr. B.L. Agarwal for the respondent No.1 has vehemently submitted that the document sought to be produced was prima facie a forged document, and there being no issue involved in the suit with regard to the said document, it could not be permitted to be produced at the fag end of the suit, when it is at the stage of final arguments. He also submitted that there being no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the trial court, this Court should not interfere with the same. Mr. Agarwal has relied upon the judgment of this Court in case of Ram Gopal Sharma versus ACJ (JD) Cum JM, First Class, Jaipur City (East), Jaipur & Anr. 2012 WLC (Raj.) UC 688, in support of his submissions that the document could not be permitted to be produced at the fag end of the suit, without any genuine reason shown by the defendants.;