In a surprising turn of events, the Bombay High Court has allowed Mr. Jijabhau Dyaneshwar Temgire to present new documents while questioning Mr. Gangaram Khandu Temgire. This decision changes a previous ruling and could affect a property dispute case in Pune.
The case is about a property dispute in Thorandale, Taluka – Ambegaon, Pune. Mr. Jijabhau Dyaneshwar Temgire is involved in a legal fight against Mr. Gangaram Khandu Temgire and others over the cancellation of sale agreements. The people suing claim that Mr. Jijabhau misused a canceled power of attorney to create fake sale agreements in favor of another person.
Mr. Jijabhau wanted to show receipts during the questioning to prove he paid Rs. 5 Lakhs to the people suing him. At first, the trial court didn't allow this, saying the documents weren't submitted with the initial written statement. However, Mr. Jijabhau argued that these receipts were important for his defense.
"The documents sought to be produced to confront plaintiff no. 1 cannot be said to be divorced from or foreign to the pleadings," the court noted.
Mr. Jijabhau’s legal team referred to a decision by the Supreme Court in Mohammed Abdul Wahid Vs Nilofer, which supports showing documents during questioning if they are important and related to the case.
On the other hand, the people suing argued that the rules under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) do not allow for such late submissions unless they are for reminding a witness or contradicting them.
Justice Gauri Godse of the Bombay High Court canceled the trial court’s order from December 8, 2021. The judge decided that Mr. Jijabhau could show the documents during the questioning, emphasizing that rules should not stop justice.
"The documents that are not divorced from or foreign to the pleadings made can be permitted to be produced during the cross-examination of a witness," Justice Godse explained.
The trial court in Khed, Rajgurunagar, must now allow Mr. Jijabhau to present his evidence. This decision could greatly affect the result of the property dispute and sets an example for how documents can be introduced in court.
