Hardeep Singh Sidhu Vs Harcharan Singh Sidhu — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Hardeep Singh Sidhu Vs Harcharan Singh Sidhu — Jharkhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the plaintiff's application under Order XI Rule 12 CPC for discovery and production of the original gift deeds should be allowed on his apprehension that the originals are at variance with the certified copies already filed.

Court's answer

Since the gift deeds were admittedly executed in favour of the defendants and their parents, the original documents are logically in the possession of the defendants.

Ratio / Principle

The factum of fraud and forgery does not hinge on the production of the originals, as the certified copies have already been filed.

Key takeaways

At this stage, a mere vague apprehension cannot be a ground for directing production of the original documents.ratio¶22
No infirmity was found in the impugned order rejecting the discovery petition, and the Civil Miscellaneous Petition was accordingly dismissed.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Miscellaneous Petition (C.M.P. No. 757 of 2023, High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi) dismissed by Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J. on 08.09.2025. The petitioner, plaintiff in Title Suit Case No. 113 of 2013 challenging gift deeds Nos. 4483, 4484 and 4485 (executed 22.05.1982 by Sardar Hem Singh) as forged and fabricated, had moved under Order XI Rule 12 CPC for discovery and production of the original gift deeds from the defendants; the application was rejected below because the discovery step was not taken before settlement of issues. The High Court held that although the originals are logically in the defendants' possession (the deeds being admittedly executed in favour of the defendants and their parents), the factum of fraud and forgery does not hinge on production of the originals since certified copies were already filed, and a mere vague apprehension that the originals differ from the certified copies cannot justify a direction for production. Finding no infirmity in the impugned order, the Court dismissed the petition; pending I.A., if any, stood disposed of.

2025:JHHC:27071

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 757 of 2023

Hardeep Singh Sidhu, S/o Late Darshan Singh Sindhu, R/o Nanak Kutir, Hem Singh Bagan Area, Plot No. 107, 108 & 109/61, Ward No.12, New Kalimati Road, Near Over Bridge, P.O.-Sakchi, P.S.-Golmuri, District-East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur ..... .... Petitioner

Versus

Harcharan Singh Sidhu, S/o Late Sunender Singh Sidhu @ Late Surender Singh Sidhu

Karamjit Kaur, W/o Late Sukhbir Singh Sidhu

Navtej Singh Sidhu, S/o Late Sukhbir Singh Sidhu

Jagdip Kaur, D/o Late Sukhbir Singh Sidhu

Mandip Kaur, D/o Late Sukhbir Singh Sidhu

All residents of Hem Singh Bagan Area, New Kalimati Road, Near Over Bridge, P.O.-Sakchi, P.S.-Golmuri, District-East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur

Manjinder Kaur, W/o Pritpal Singh Pritha D/o Surender Singh, R/o Near Gouripur Petrol Pump, Gouripur, P.O. & P.S.-Dum Dum, District-Kolkata (West Bengal)

… …. Opposite Parties

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Jitendra Nath Upadhyay, Advocate

------

Order No. 05 / Dated : 08.09.2025.

Petitioner is the plaintiff who has filed Title Suit Case No. 113 of 2013 for declaration that the deed of gifts Nos. 4483, 4484 and 4485 executed on 22.05.1982 by Sardar Hem Singh in favour of the defendants and their parents are forged, fabricated, null, void, ineffective and not binding on the plaintiff.

Plaintiff filed the petition under Order XI Rule 12 of the CPC for discovery and production of the original gift deeds in custody of the defendants which has been rejected on the ground that the step for discovery was not taken before the settlement of issue.

It is submitted by the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner apprehends that the original document of gifts is at variance with the certified copy and therefore, in order to verify the same, this petition was filed.

In view of the fact that in the present suit filed by the plaintiff/petitioner, the main issue is that the said gift deeds were executed by fraud or forgery for which the certified copies of deeds have already been produced. Since,

2025:JHHC:27071

admittedly the gift deeds have been executed in favour of the defendants and their parents, therefore, the original documents are logically to be in possession of the defendants. The factum of fraud and forgery does not hinge on the production of the originals, as the certified copies have already been filed. At this stage, mere vague apprehension cannot be a ground for direction of production of the original.

Having considered the submissions, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order.

Civil Miscellaneous Petition, accordingly, stands dismissed.

Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J . )

Pawan / -