The High Court allowed a civil revision petition set aside an impugned order refusing to admit documents due to technical defects in the affidavit and reason for non-filing, holding such technicalities should not defeat justice.
Impugned order set aside; liberty granted to petitioner to file appropriate petition in lower Court.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.2011 OF 2014
ORDER:
This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 18.02.2014 in I.A.No.759 of 2013 in O.S.No.98 of 2010, passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Nizamabad, refusing to receive the documents 1 to 4 listed in the petition.
Learned Judge of the trial Court had assigned the following
reasons:
Prima facie, the objections raised by the learned judge for taking the documents cannot be found fault with. However, in the considered opinion of this Court, they are too hyper technical and these technicalities should not allow the interest of justice to be defeated. In those circumstances, the order under challenge is set aside, giving liberty to the petitioner-plaintiff to move the Court below by filing appropriate petition in the interest of justice. In the event of such application is filed, the Court below shall deal with the same in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed to the extent indicated. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
___________________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
Date:11.07.2014. Ssv
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.2011 OF 2014
DATE: 1 1 TH JULY, 2014.
SSV
1 issue framed by the court
Whether hyper-technical objections regarding affidavit defects and non-filing of documents should defeat the interest of justice in pending civil litigation.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
Respondent
Challa Kodanda Ram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
