A writ petition challenging the District Court's order allowing a document to be placed on record. The High Court held that relevancy is to be decided after giving parties an opportunity and declined to interfere, dismissing the petition.
Writ Petition dismissed; High Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction.
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.
06-WP-344-2021.DOC
Andreza
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 344 OF 2021
…PETITIONER
…RESPONDENTS
Mr. Sarvadnya D. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioners.
CORAM: MANISH PITALE, J DATED: 11th October 2021
P.C.
1. By this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the Order dated 23.09.2021, whereby on an application moved by the Respondents for placing on record a document, the same has been allowed. While allowing the document to be produced, the District Court has specifically observed that the question as to whether the said document is relevant or not will be decided after proper opportunity is given to the parties to comment upon the same.
2. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner invited attention of this Court to the Judgment and order dated 19.03.2021 passed in Second Appeal No. 107/2011, whereby the Appeal was disposed of by directing the District Court to permit the parties to lead evidence both oral as well as documentary in the context of application for condonation of delay. According to the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, this has to be read with the observation made in paragraph 11 of the said
Page 1 of 3 11th October 2021
06-WP-344-2021.DOC
Judgment and Order concerning the allegation of collusion or
fraud made in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
3. According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the document permitted to be placed on record is wholly irrelevant to the question of collusion/fraud while deciding the application for condonation of delay. According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the District Court could not have allowed such irrelevant material to be placed on record.
4. This Court has perused the Writ Petition, the impugned order and the material placed on record. The approach adopted by the District Court appears to be reasonable because it is specifically observed in paragraph 3 as follows :
“3. It is taken note of that the Hon'ble High
Court of Bombay at Goa has held in Second
Appeal no. 107 of 2011 (Communidade of
mapusa vs. Smt. Prabhavati Prabhakar Parob
abnd another) by an Oral Judgment dated
19.3.2021, held that this Court is to permit the
parties to lead evidence, both oral as well as
documentary. Though respondent no. 1
contends that the document sought to be
produced is irrelevant, this will have to be
decided only after an opportunity is given to the
applicant to produce the document and to show
its relevancy. It would not be proper to disallow
the applicant to produce the document, as it will
deny the applicant an opportunity of showing
Page 2 of 3 11th October 2021
06-WP-344-2021.DOC
its relevancy. Accordingly, this application is
allowed.”
5. This Court finds that when the question of document being relevant or irrelevant has been kept open, there can be no cause for grievance as sought to be raised by the Petitioner before this Court. Hence, this Court declines to exercise writ jurisdiction in this matter.
6. The Writ Petition is dismissed.
MANISH PITALE, J.
ANDREZA PEREIRA Digitally signed by ANDREZA PEREIRA Date: 2021.10.11 17:19:28 +05'30'
Page 3 of 3 11th October 2021
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the District Court erred in allowing a document to be placed on record pending an opportunity to prove its relevance.
Whether this Court should exercise writ jurisdiction to interfere with the District Court's discretionary decision on the production of documentary evidence.
Prabhavati Parab
Communidade of Mapusa
Manish Pitale
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court