1 ( 2025:HHC:29861 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.436 of 2023 Date of Decision : 02.09.2025 M/s Supreme Automobiles …… Petitioner Versus Nazia Biwi and another ……Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Mr. Surinder Saklani, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Pushpinder Kumar, Advocate, vice Mr. K.B. Khajuria, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Respondent No.1 proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 18.9.2023. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner against impugned order dated 14.06.2023, passed by Civil Judge, Court No.3, Mandi, District Mandi, whereby an application filed under Order 7 Rule 14-A read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code filed by the present petitioner (plaintiff) has been dismissed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the impugned order and the documents appended along with present petition. 3. Admittedly, in the case at hand, the petitioner is a partnership firm. The said partnership firm concern has filed a suit for recovery against 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ( 2025:HHC:29861 ) the present respondent. In the plaint filed, it has been averred that the plaintiff carries on a business of repairing of vehicles. One Sanjay Bisht is stated to be authorized and competent person to institute a suit in the case at hand. It is further contended in the suit that a vehicle had been got repaired by the respondent, but they had not made payment and hence petitioner concern was forced to file the present suit for recovery. 4. Post conclusion of the evidence of both the parties, an application under Order 7 Rule 14 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code was filed by the present petitioner before the trial Court. 5. By virtue of the present application what is sought to be placed on record is a letter dated 17.11.2018 which pertains to amendment in the constitution of the partnership-firm, i.e., petitioner concern. What has been submitted in the application is that due to inadvertence the said document could not be filed earlier. Other than the aforesaid, it is submitted in the application that the same is essential for proper adjudication of the matter inter se the parties. 6. In the aforesaid backdrop, the trial Court rejected the present application on the ground that no cogent reason has been given in the application, as to why the document had been filed at a belated stage. 7. The suit, in the case at hand, was filed in February, 2015. Rights inter se the parties have to be adjudicated as on date of filing of the plaint. In this respect, reference can be made to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rameshwar and others vs. Jot Ram and others, AIR 1976 SC 49. 3 ( 2025:HHC:29861 ) 8. The document sought to be placed on record is dated 17.11.2018. Hence, the same was not in existence once the plaint was filed. In such a circumstance, no reference of the same could have been made in the plaint. In the aforesaid facts, a recourse to Order 7 Rule 14 of the Civil Procedure Code, in the case at hand, is without any basis. 9. Reliance on Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code is also of no avail on account of the fact that the rights in the suit, in the case at hand, will have to be adjudicated as on the date of filing of the suit, i.e., February, 2015. Nothing has been stated in the application for placing on record the letter dated 17.11.2018, as to now the alleged change in the constitution of partnership firm, would affect the continuation of the suit in the present form, by the petitioner concern. Therefore, the application filed does not appear to be bona fide. The same has been filed to protract the trial unnecessarily. Moreover, its earlier non production has not been justified by any valid and sufficient reasons. 10. In view of the aforesaid, I see no reason to interfere in the impugned order dated 14.06.2023, passed by Civil Judge, Court No.3, Mandi, District Mandi. The petition is dismissed accordingly. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 11. The parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 17.09.2025. (Bipin Chander Negi) September 2, 2025 (KS) Judge