Order XIII Rule 9 CPC should Be Applied To Recognise Rightful Owner Of Documents, Irrespective Of Who Physically Produced Them During Trial: Karnataka HC

The Bench quashed the order of the trial Court which dismissed the petitioner’s prayer seeking the return of the original documents produced during a trial. The trial court had dismissed the application on the ground that the title documents were produced by the respondent and under Order XIII Rule 9 of the CPC, documents admitted in evidence should be returned to the person who produced them in the suit.

A Single Bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum observed, “The Trial Court's decision to withhold the documents from the petitioner based solely on the fact that they were produced by the respondent, ignores the broader purpose of Order XIII Rule 9. The provision is not strictly limited to the party that physically submits the documents in Court. Instead, it extends to ensuring rightful ownership and fair administration of justice. This means that the Rule should be applied in a manner that recognizes the rightful owner of the documents, irrespective of who produced them during trial.”

Advocate S. B. Doddagoudar represented the petitioner.

The petitioner sought the return of original documents produced during a suit for specific performance initiated by the respondent. The respondent had filed a suit based on an agreement to sell, which included documents such as a sale deed and a Will. These documents were initially collected from the petitioner.

Even after the dismissal of the specific performance suit and subsequent upholding of this dismissal, the petitioner faced challenges in retrieving the original documents. The trial court allowed the return of some documents but denied the return of the original title documents, leading to the petitioner's review application, which was also dismissed.

The High Court explained that although Order XIII Rule 9 of the CPC contemplated that admitted documents should be returned to the party who produced them, it did not bar a party from seeking the return of original documents even if they were not produced by such party.

“The provisions of Order XIII Rule 9 of CPC should not be narrowly interpreted. This Court recognizes the petitioner’s entitlement to these documents, despite their production by the respondent-plaintiff during the suit for specific performance,” the Court explained.

After establishing that the petitioner was the rightful owner of the original documents, the Court stated that the same should be returned to him since the documents were only produced by the respondent during the suit and it did not negate the petitioner’s entitlement to them.

Consequently, the Dharwad Bench held, “By rigidly applying the literal language of Order XIII Rule 9, the Trial Court lost sight of an essential principle: the plaintiff, having lost the suit, has no legitimate claim to retain the title documents.”

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition.

Cause Title: R. Shankar v. E. Rammohan Chowdary

Click here to read/download the Order