Directions regarding the listing and exhibiting of specific documents in an ordinary original civil suit, subject to parties' rights to cross-examine witnesses on contents.
Documents at various serial numbers were exhibited subject to the reservation of rights for cross-examination on contents.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.945 OF 1991
IN
SUIT NO.1423 OF 1984
M/s.Atul Development
Corporation
Corporation.. Plaintiff
Versus
Bhagwandas Gordhandas Kapadia
and Ors... Defendants
Mr.S.U.Kamdar, Senior Advocate i/b. Mahimtura &
Co. for plaintiffs.
Mr.Zal Andhyarujina i/b.M.Hiralal & Co. for
defendant Nos. 7 to 18 and 26
CORAM :S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.
DATE:11th February 2009.
P.C.
.The matter was placed for directions as
it is not disputed by both sides that oral
evidence will have to be recorded. Therefore,
the matter was placed for directions with regard
to admission and denial of documents. Mr.Kamdar,
learned Senior Counsel invited my attention to
2
the letter dated 5th January 2009 addressed by
the Advocate for defendants to plaintiffs’
Attorneys, setting out therein seriatim the
documents which are relied upon by the plaintiff
and existence of which and/or contents thereof
are admitted/ denied.
2.Mr.Makhija, learned Counsel appearing for
defendants states that those of the documents
where existence is admitted, can be marked as
Exhibits.
3.Accordingly, documents at serial Nos.1, 3
to 7, 11, 13 to 23 and 24 to 26 are admitted.
4.As far as document at Serial No.2 is
concerned, i.e. the plan regarding which
plaintiffs’ witness has deposed in chief,
Mr.Makhija states that the plan may have been
produced but there are several issues which
arise. Therefore, reserving the right of the
3
defendants to cross examine the witness with
regard to the contents and the dimensions/
specifications/ boundary with regard to the
properties and structures enlisted therein, these
documents can be exhibited. Accordingly the plan
at Serial No.2 is exhibited, subject to the right
of the defendants to cross examine the witness.
5.As far as documents at serial Nos.8 to 10
are concerned, the witness has produced them
along with affidavit in chief. These documents
are also exhibited subject to the right of
defendants to cross examine the witness with
regard to the contents thereof.
6.Documents at serial No.12 is original
letter of possession regarding which the witness
has stated in para 11 in chief. Defendants’
Counsel states that defendants are not parties to
these documents. However, reserving the rights
of the defendants to cross examine the witness
4
with regard to the contents of the same so also
without in any manner giving up the plea that the
signatories to these documents must also be
produced as witnesses, the same can be exhibited.
They are accordingly, exhibited.
7.Needless to state that the above
documents so also all others in the letter dated
5th January 2009 being exhibited does not mean
that defendants’ right to cross examine the
witness on the contents thereof is in any way at
this stage affected. Subject to these rights
being reserved and protected, these documents are
exhibited.
8.Mr.Kamdar, learned Senior Counsel states
that as far as document which is enlisted at
serial No.11 of the letter dated 5th January
2009, the plaintiffs’ attorneys have applied for
issuance of certified true copies thereof and as
and when the same are made available, they would
5
be produced.
9.As far as defendant’s affidavit of
documents are concerned, reliance is placed by
Mr.Makhija on the letter dated 8th December 2008
addressed by plaintiffs’ Advocate to defendant’s
Advocate.
10.Documents enlisted in the second schedule
of this letter at serial Nos.2 to 5 are exhibited
subject to plaintiffs’ right to cross examine the
witness.
11.As far as documents enlisted in the first
schedule and serial No.1 of the second schedule,
Mr.Makhija states that he would adopt appropriate
proceedings. Mr.Makhija states that he would
file affidavit of evidence and prove the
documents in accordance with law.
12.S.O. 17th March 2009 for recording
6
evidence. Both letters are taken on record.
(S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)
SC DHARMADHIKARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court