Case Note & Summary
The petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of a contract for sale of property, seeking to direct the defendants to accept the balance sale consideration of Rs.1,52,50,000/- and execute the sale deed. During the trial, the plaintiff filed a notice to admit documents under Order XII Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). The trial court, by order dated 15.9.2017, rejected the notice. The plaintiff challenged this order by way of a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka. The High Court examined the scope of Order XII Rule 2 CPC, which allows a party to call upon the other party to admit the genuineness of documents. The court noted that the trial court had rejected the notice on the ground that the documents were already on record and the defendants had not admitted them. The High Court held that the trial court's discretion in rejecting the notice was not perverse or arbitrary, and the plaintiff failed to show that the documents were admitted or that the rejection caused any prejudice. The High Court, therefore, dismissed the writ petition, upholding the trial court's order.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Notice to Admit Documents - Order XII Rule 2 CPC - Rejection of Notice - The plaintiff filed a notice to admit documents under Order XII Rule 2 CPC, which the trial court rejected on the ground that the documents were already on record and the defendants had not admitted them. The High Court held that the trial court's discretion in rejecting the notice was not perverse or arbitrary, and no interference was warranted under Article 227 of the Constitution. (Paras 1-6)
B) Civil Procedure - Interference under Article 227 - Scope - The High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 is limited to correcting errors of jurisdiction or perversity. The trial court's order rejecting the notice to admit documents did not suffer from any such error, as the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the documents were admitted or that the rejection caused any prejudice. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in rejecting the notice to admit documents filed by the plaintiff under Order XII Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the trial court's order dated 15.9.2017 rejecting the notice to admit documents.
Law Points
- Order XII Rule 2 CPC
- Notice to admit documents
- Rejection of notice
- Discretion of trial court
- Interference under Article 227
Case Details
2017 LawText (KAR) (12) 18
Writ Petition No.46653/2017 (GM-CPC)
Sri D. R. Ravishankar for petitioner, Sri S.V. Giridhar for respondents
Lt. Col. Appu Ramanand Sharma (Retd.) and Smt. Preethi Sharma
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil writ petition challenging rejection of notice to admit documents in a suit for specific performance.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside the trial court's order dated 15.9.2017 rejecting the notice to admit documents.
Filing Reason
The trial court rejected the plaintiff's notice to admit documents under Order XII Rule 2 CPC.
Previous Decisions
The trial court (VIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore) rejected the notice to admit documents on 15.9.2017 in O.S.No.5395/2011.
Issues
Whether the trial court was justified in rejecting the notice to admit documents under Order XII Rule 2 CPC.
Whether the High Court should interfere under Article 227 with the trial court's discretionary order.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the trial court erred in rejecting the notice to admit documents.
Respondents supported the trial court's order.
Ratio Decidendi
The trial court's discretion under Order XII Rule 2 CPC to reject a notice to admit documents is not to be interfered with under Article 227 unless it is perverse or arbitrary. The plaintiff failed to show that the documents were admitted or that the rejection caused any prejudice.
Judgment Excerpts
This is the plaintiff’s writ petition against the order dated 15.9.2017 made in O.S.No.5395/2011 on the file of the VIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore rejecting the notice to admit documents filed by the plaintiff.
The petitioner-plaintiff filed O.S.No.5395/2011 for specific performance directing the defendants to accept the balance sale consideration of Rs.1,52,50,000/- and to execute the sale deed in respect of the suit schedule property and to deliver possession thereof, failing which, the Court may permit the plaintiff to deposit the entire amount upon the decree before the Court contending that defendant No.1, who is the owner of the suit schedule property morefully described in the schedule to the plaint intending to offer to sell the schedule property to him and accordingly, the
Procedural History
The plaintiff filed O.S.No.5395/2011 for specific performance. During trial, the plaintiff filed a notice to admit documents under Order XII Rule 2 CPC. The trial court rejected the notice on 15.9.2017. The plaintiff challenged this order by filing Writ Petition No.46653/2017 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Order XII Rule 2
- Constitution of India: Article 227
