Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Shrish Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar

Shrish Kumar vs Ajay Kumar

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jan 24, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1040208

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Shrish Kumar

Respondent

Ajay Kumar

Excerpt

writ petition no :20438. / 2012 shrish kumar versus ajay kumar and state of mp. 24.01.2013. shri m. adil usmani for the petitioner. challenge in this writ petition under article 227 of the constitution is made to an interlocutory order-dated 9.11.2012, passed by additional district judge, maihar, district satna in regular civil suit no.25-a/2007, whereby the learned court has refused to take on record certain documents filed by the petitioner and rejected his application for taking the documents on record. petitioner is plaintiff and has filed the suit in question for specific performance of a contract dated 13.12.2007 in respect of the suit property. the defendant/respondent has filed reply and has denied execution of the contract and says that no such contract was ever executed. in the pending suit, petitioner filed two applications - one under order xviii rule 17, and another under order viii rule 3 read with section 151 of the code of civil procedure. the application under order xviii rule 17 was recalling a witness ajay kumar, to prove the sale-deed dated 1.3.1999; and, the second application was for bringing on record the agreement and it was stated that by the said document petitioner wanted to prove that certain witness namely one shri arvind kumar jaiswal has given a false and wrong statement. the court has found that for proving the character of a witness the document cannot be taken on record and by holding that the witness, who has been produced, has been elaborately cross-examined and the reasons given for recalling him is no.2 writ petition no :20438. / 2012 shrish kumar versus ajay kumar and state of mp. tenable, the application is rejected. rejection of the application as indicated hereinabove cannot be termed as pervers.or illegal warranting interference at this interlocutory stage, in a petition under article 227 of the constitution. accordingly, finding no ground for interference, the petition is dismissed. (rajendra menon) judge aks/-

Full Judgment

Writ Petition No :

20438. / 2012 Shrish Kumar versus Ajay Kumar and State of MP.

24.01.2013.

Shri M.

Adil Usmani for the petitioner.

Challenge in this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is made to an interlocutory order-dated 9.11.2012, passed by Additional District Judge, Maihar, District Satna in Regular Civil Suit No.25-A/2007, whereby the learned Court has refused to take on record certain documents filed by the petitioner and rejected his application for taking the documents on record.

Petitioner is plaintiff and has filed the suit in question for specific performance of a contract dated 13.12.2007 in respect of the suit property.

The defendant/respondent has filed reply and has denied execution of the contract and says that no such contract was ever executed.

In the pending suit, petitioner filed two applications - one under Order XVIII Rule 17, and another under Order VIII Rule 3 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The application under Order XVIII Rule 17 was recalling a witness Ajay Kumar, to prove the sale-deed dated 1.3.1999; and, the second application was for bringing on record the agreement and it was stated that by the said document petitioner wanted to prove that certain witness namely one Shri Arvind Kumar Jaiswal has given a false and wrong statement.

The Court has found that for proving the character of a witness the document cannot be taken on record and by holding that the witness, who has been produced, has been elaborately cross-examined and the reasons given for recalling him is No.2 Writ Petition No :

20438. / 2012 Shrish Kumar versus Ajay Kumar and State of MP.

tenable, the application is rejected.

Rejection of the application as indicated hereinabove cannot be termed as perveRs.or illegal warranting interference at this interlocutory stage, in a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution.

Accordingly, finding no ground for interference, the petition is dismissed.

(RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE Aks/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial