L.P. Selvam v. S. Kannammal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 31.08.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN C.R.P.(PD)No.1755 of 2021 and C.M.P.No.13581 of 2021 (Through Video Conference)

1) L.P.Selvam

2) R.P.Raja ... Petitioners/Plaintiff

Versus

S.Kannammal ... Respondent/Defendant PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the fair and decretal order dated 20.04.2021 made in I.A.No.03 of 2021 in O.S.No.132 of 2016 passed by the Sessions (Fast Track Mahila) Judge, Namakkal District.

For Petitioners: Mr.N.Vijaya Basker O R D E R This Civil Revision Petition is filed to set aside the order passed in I.A.No.03 of 2021 in O.S.No.132 of 2016 by the learned Sessions (Fast Track Mahila) Judge, Namakkal District.

2. I.A.No.3 of 2021 was filed by the respondent under Order VIII Rule 1A (3) and Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, seeking permission to receive the document, namely General Power of Attorney Deed dated 24.12.2013. It is seen from the affidavit filed in support of this petition that this document has not been filed along with the written statement because it was misplaced. This document is vital to prove the case of the respondent. Therefore, this Interlocutory Application was filed.

3. The petitioners opposed this petition on the ground that the respondent could have obtained certified copies and filed the document along with the written statement. Moreover, this petition has been filed with a delay of five years. Therefore, the petitioner sought for the dismissal of the Petition.

4. Learned Sessions (Fast Track Mahila) Judge, Namakkal District, after considering the rival submissions, allowed the petition on the reasoning that the documents produced by the parties may be received with regard to proof and admissibility. Against the said order, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent filed written statement on 13.01.2017. After four years, I.A.No.3 of 2021 was filed, seeking permission to receive documents. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the parties to the suit are not parties to the document and this document has no relevance, what so ever, to this case. Therefore, he submits that allowing I.A.No.3 of 2021 is not correct and the order has to be set aside.

6. As already stated, the respondent had filed I.A.No.3 of 2021 alleging that the General Power of Attorney Deed, dated 24.12.2013 is a vital document to prover her case. How this document is vital to prove the case of the respondent, is known only to the respondent. However, as rightly observed by the learned Sessions (Fast Track Mahila) Judge in the trial Court, the parties must be given fullest opportunity to prove their case by oral and documentary evidence, so that, the Court will be in a position to render substantial justice to the parties. Documents produced by the parties can be received in evidence, subject to admissibility, relevancy and proof before the trial Court. If that opportunity is denied before trial Court, the parties may lose their valuable right.

In this view of the matter, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Sessions (Fast Track Mahila) Judge, Namakkal District and the order stands confirmed. Accordingly, the document can be received subject to admissibility, relevancy and proof. Thus, the Civil Revision Petition stands Dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS V) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

sts/gd To:

The Sessions (Fast Track Mahila) Judge, Namakkal District.

C.R.P. No.1755 of 2021 ca[co] srg 26/10/2021