Delhi High Court Upholds Trial Court's Decision on Late Submission of Ownership Documents

Court dismisses petition against trial court allowing late document filing, emphasizes necessity due to cross-examination.

In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Girish Kathpalia, has upheld a trial court's decision that permitted the submission of ownership-related documents by the respondent/plaintiff, Shiv Kumar, in a civil suit. The documents, which were not available at the time of the filing of the written statement or the framing of issues, were allowed to be placed on record due to their necessity arising from cross-examination by the petitioners/defendants, Kanchan Saini and another party.

The petitioners had challenged the trial court's order dated August 19, 2025, which allowed the respondent to file a conveyance deed, authorization slip, registration fees receipt, and municipal tax receipt. These documents came into existence in September and October 2023, well after the suit was filed in September 2021 and issues were framed in October 2022.

During the ongoing testimony of the respondent/plaintiff, a question posed in cross-examination highlighted the absence of documents proving ownership, prompting the respondent to assert possession of all necessary documents. This situation led to the application under Order VII Rule 14 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, which allows for the submission of documents not initially presented.

The petitioners argued that the documents were not filed immediately after they were created and questioned the delay until November 2024. However, Justice Kathpalia emphasized that the necessity for filing arose directly from the petitioners' line of questioning during cross-examination, which suggested the respondent was not the property owner. The court noted that the petitioners themselves had created the circumstances necessitating the late submission, and any failure to file could have led to adverse inferences against the respondent.

Finding no legal infirmity in the trial court's order, Justice Kathpalia dismissed the petition and accompanying applications, maintaining the decision to allow the late filing of documents in the interest of justice.

Bottom Line:

Application under Order VII Rule 14 CPC - Trial court allowing respondent/plaintiff to place on record documents related to ownership - Documents were not in existence at the time of filing of written statement or framing of issues - Necessity for filing arose due to cross-examination by petitioners/defendants.

Statutory provision(s): Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Order VII Rule 14

Kanchan Saini v. Shiv Kumar, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2814191