Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, G B Vijaykumar, was a witness in a civil suit O.S. No. 2216/2005 pending before the XXIV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore. The plaintiff, K R Nagaraja, filed I.A. No. 13 under Order 16 Rules 1 and 6 CPC seeking summons to the petitioner to produce original documents of title belonging to the petitioner's property. The petitioner filed I.A. No. 14 to recall the order issuing summons. The trial court, after hearing both sides, passed the impugned order directing the petitioner to produce the documents. The petitioner challenged this order by way of a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The High Court observed that under Order 16 Rule 6 CPC, the court must be satisfied that the document is in the possession or power of the witness before issuing summons. In the present case, the trial court did not record any such satisfaction. The petitioner, being a third party and not a party to the suit, could not be compelled to produce his own title deeds which were not in his possession or power. The High Court set aside the impugned order and allowed the writ petition.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Summons to Produce Documents - Order 16 Rule 6 CPC - Court must be satisfied that the document is in the possession or power of the witness before issuing summons - The trial court issued summons to the petitioner, a witness, to produce original title deeds of his property without recording satisfaction that the documents were in his possession or power - Held that the order is unsustainable and set aside (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a witness who is not a party to the suit can be compelled to produce original title deeds of his own property which are not in his possession or power?
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 10.08.2012 passed by the XXIV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City, on I.A. No. 14 in O.S. No. 2216/2005 is set aside.
Law Points
- Order 16 Rule 6 CPC
- Summons to produce document
- Possession or power of witness
- Duty of court to satisfy
- Witness not a party
- Title deeds of third party
Case Details
2014 LawText (KAR) (03) 32
W.P.No. 29322 of 2012 (GM-CPC)
Sri Chaitanya Hegade for petitioner, Sri K S Ramesh for respondent 1
K R Nagaraja, A. Ramu @ Somanna, N. Muninanjachary, Vasu R., K.S.N. Hari, Smt. Sumedha Purohit, P. Shankar Kumar, Master Vibhav Purohit, The Standard Chartered Bank
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging order of trial court directing a witness to produce original title deeds of his property.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside the order dated 10.08.2012 passed by the XXIV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore City, on I.A. No. 14 in O.S. No. 2216/2005.
Filing Reason
The trial court issued summons to the petitioner, a witness, to produce original documents of title belonging to his property, which the petitioner contended were not in his possession or power.
Previous Decisions
The trial court passed the impugned order directing the witness to produce the documents of title which are in his possession.
Issues
Whether the trial court was justified in issuing summons to a witness to produce documents without recording satisfaction that the documents are in his possession or power as required under Order 16 Rule 6 CPC?
Whether a third party witness can be compelled to produce his own title deeds in a suit to which he is not a party?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the documents sought to be produced are not in his possession or power and that the trial court did not record any satisfaction as required under Order 16 Rule 6 CPC.
Plaintiff opposed the application to recall summons, contending that the witness should produce the documents.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Order 16 Rule 6 CPC, the court must be satisfied that the document is in the possession or power of the witness before issuing summons to produce it. In the absence of such satisfaction, the order is unsustainable. A third party witness cannot be compelled to produce documents not in his possession or power.
Judgment Excerpts
This Writ Petition is filed by a witness in the suit who has been summoned to produce the original documents of title belonging to his property.
After hearing both the parties to I.A.13 and I.A.14, the trial Court passed the impugned order directing the witness to produce the documents of title which are in his possession.
Under Order 16 Rule 6 CPC, the court must be satisfied that the document is in the possession or power of the witness before issuing summons.
Procedural History
The plaintiff filed O.S. No. 2216/2005 against A. Ramu and others. The plaintiff filed I.A. No. 13 under Order 16 Rules 1 and 6 CPC for summons to the petitioner to produce original title deeds. The petitioner filed I.A. No. 14 to recall the order. The trial court passed the impugned order on 10.08.2012 directing the petitioner to produce the documents. The petitioner filed the present writ petition on 20.03.2014.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order 16 Rule 1, Order 16 Rule 6
- Constitution of India: Article 226, Article 227
