On 29-3-1978 Haji Muhammad Zakaria filed suit for possession by pre-emption against Khushi Muhammad and others, the petitioners. The suit was resisted, final arguments were heard but before the trial Court could announce judgment, the respondent moved application under Order XIII, rule 2, C.P.C., for permission to produce Khasra Girdawari from Kharif 1967 to Rabi 1979. The trial Court allowed application on 26-4-1980 on the grounds that applicant had already produced copies of mutation to prove his ownership in Mauza and that Khasra Girdawari was being sought to be produced in evidence only to relent the defendant's contention that the title of the plaintiff was not valid and that the document was necessary for the just decision of the rights of the parties, hence this revision.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the matter was not considered in its true perspective inasmuch as no good cause was shown for the non-production of document at an early stage. Conversely the learned counsel for the respondent supported the judgment of the trial Court.
3. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I find that the suit was filed on 29-3-1978 and application for permission to produce Khasra Girdawari at subsequent stage was moved on 9-4-1980 and that the learned trial Court did not consider the real question i.e. showing of good cause for the non-production of documents. The facts that the Khasra Girdawari was a public document and its authenticity was beyond any doubt or that the document was necessary for the just decision of the case do not show that there was good cause for non-production thereof. To my mind, the trial Court has without considering the real and most important question i.e. good-cause for non-production of documents at early stage, had arbitrarily allowed application. Even before me the learned counsel has failed to show good cause for the non-production of document at early stage.
4. For what has been stated above, the revision is accepted and the impugned order is set aside.