In CR No.3975 of 2017 (O&M)-PUNJ HC- P&H HC sets aside Order whereby application filed under Order XI Rule 14 of CPC was dismissed after noting that order did not record reason that documents sought to be produced were necessary for deciding controversy  
Justice Alka Sarin [16-03-2023]

Read Order: RAGHBIR VS PARDEEP AND OTHERS

LE Correspondent

Chandigarh, March 17, 2023:The Punjab and Haryana High Court has reaffirmed that the Court has to satisfy itself with regard to the necessity and relevance of the documents while considering a revision petition assailing the order whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order XI Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for production of necessary documents was dismissed.
 

A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Alka Sarin disposed of the instant application by observing that Counsel for the parties were ad idem that the impugned order in the present case did  not record any reason or satisfaction that the documents sought to be produced under Order XI Rule 14 CPC were  necessary for deciding the controversy in hand. 

Reference was placed on the judgment in Desa Singh through LRs vs. Sukhraj Kaur & Ors, wherein this Court held that the Court has to satisfy itself with regard to the necessity and relevance of the document. The Court has to record its satisfaction in terms of provision of Order 11 Rule 12 CPC that the document in question is not necessary either for disposing fairly  of the suit or for saving costs. On that premise, the Court has to record findings in respect of satisfaction and the possession of the document with the defendant. 

Counsel for the parties were ad idem that the impugned order in the present case did  not record any reason or satisfaction that the documents sought to be produced under Order XI Rule 14 CPC were  necessary for deciding the controversy in hand, the Court noted. 

In view of the above, the impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Trial Court for a decision afresh on the application. Since the suit was pending since 2013, the Trial Court was requested to expedite the hearing of the case and decide the same as early as possible.