- (1.) This writ petition is directed against the order dated 15.09.2005 as passed by the learned Judge, Debt Relief Court, Sriganganagar in Case No. 2/2002 upholding an objection against production of a document (Jamabandi) by the applicant in cross-examination of the non-applicant.
(2.) Briefly put, the relevant facts and aspects as available from the material placed on record are that the petitioner-applicant has filed an application in the Debt Relief Court, Sriganganagar against the non-applicant (respondent No. 2 herein) for recovery of an amount of Rs. 32,802/-, said to be due towards the money allegedly borrowed by the respondent No. 2 and interest due thereupon till 31.03.2001. According to the petitioner, the respondent No. 2 has filed a reply to the application denying the averments regarding borrowing of money and that apart, has taken an objection regarding jurisdiction of the court concerned to entertain the application on the ground that the respondent No. 2 neither lives at nor owns any agricultural land at Sriganganagar. The petitioner has pointed out that after framing of five issues, the evidence on behalf of the petitioner-applicant has been concluded and thereafter evidence of the non-applicant has begun; that the non-applicant has filed his affidavit in evidence and during cross-examination, counsel for the petitioner produced Jamabandi showing the name of the non-applicant as khatedar of a piece of land at Chak 3 GMD, Tehsil Suratgarh, District Sriganganagar allegedly for "refreshing the memory of the witness"; but an objection was taken that the said document having not been filed along with the plaint, the petitioner could not produce the same now.
(3.) The learned trial court has proceeded to uphold the objection by its impugned order dated 15.09.2005. The learned trial court has observed that the document has not been produced earlier nor got exhibited and the applicant s evidence had already been concluded and in cross-examination the document cannot be got exhibited from the non-applicant because, according to the learned trial court, the document was not of the non-applicant nor bearing his signatures nor was such that would refresh his memory. Aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.;