IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
WP ( C ) No. 2652 of 2008
Darbari Mahto and another …. Petitioners
Versus
Bhola Nath Mandal and others … Respondents
Coram : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.G.R. PATNAIK.
For the petitioner (s) : Mr Rupesh Kumar
For the respondents :xxx
18.03. 2009. Petitioners in this application have prayed for
quashing the order dated 23.4.2008 passed by the Sub Judge, Dhanbad, in
Title Suit no.278 of 2001 whereby the learned court below has refused to
allow the petitioners for marking certified copy of the sale deed no 8242
dated 21/5/19958 produced by the respondents, as an Exhibit.
Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the
respondents.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the
learned court below without assigning reasons has refused the petitioners’
prayer for introduction of the document which was initially produced by
the respondents/plaintiffs themselves and on which the petitioner
defendants would also rely. The same could have been accepted in
evidence and marked as Exhibit in the case, on admission.
Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand,
submits that the respondents would have no objection to the document
being introduced in evidence, but the learned counsel would point out,
that the observation in the impugned order of the court below would
indicate that the attempt on the part of the petitioners/defendants to
introduce the document was made at a belated stage when arguments in
the case were to be finally concluded.
From the facts and circumstances of the case, as also
from the impugned order, it appears that the court below wanted
expeditious disposal of the case and on such consideration, it disallowed
the prayer of the petitioners for introduction of the document. But by
doing so, the ‘expeditious disposal’ has been further delayed by the
pendency of this writ petition for almost one year .
2
Be that as it may, the impugned order of the court
below is set aside with a direction to the court below to allow the prayer
of the petitioners for introduction of the document/ sale deed, on the
condition that the petitioners/defendants shall deposit a cost of Rupees
five thousand within ten days from the date of this order and on such
deposit, the introduction of the document shall be accepted in evidence on
behalf of the petitioner.
The trial court shall also ensure that the trial is
concluded within a period of two months from the date of introduction of
the document in evidence.
With the above observation, this application is disposed
of.
Ambastha/ (D.G.R. Patnaik,J)