[2025:RJ-JP:726] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1073/2017 Ramesh Arora D/o Late Shri Deenanath Arora, Quarter No. 394, Dhruv Marg, Raja Park, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur ----Petitioner Versus Darshan Kumar Arora S/o Late Shri Deenanathji Arora, Quarter No. 394, Dhruv Marg, Raja Park, Adarsh Nagar, Jaipur ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J P Goyal, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Meenal Bhargava For Respondent(s) : Mr. M M Ranjan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Lokesh Tiwari HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 06/01/2025 This civil writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- defendant (for short ‘the defendant’) against the order dated 15.10.2016 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 15, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur in civil suit No. 334/2012, whereby the said court allowed the application filed by the respondent- plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) under Order 7 Rule 14 read with Section 151 CPC. Learned counsel for the defendant submits that the plaintiff has filed a suit for eviction, recovery of rent, mesne profit as well as mandatory and permanent injunction against the defendant in which plaintiff has filed an application under Order 7 Rule 14 CPC read with Section 151 CPC by which the plaintiff sought to take on record copy of notarized will dated 12.03.1987 executed in favour [2025:RJ-JP:726] (2 of 2) [CW-1073/2017] of plaintiff and other documents. Learned counsel for the defendant further submits that these documents are not necessary for adjudication of the suit but the trial Court wrongly allowed the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 7 Rule 14 read with Section 151 CPC. So, the order dated 15.10.2016 passed by the trial Court be set aside. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has opposed the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the defendant and submits that the documents filed by him are relevant for adjudication of the suit. So, the present petition filed by the defendant be dismissed. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the plaintiff as well as learned counsel for the defendant and perused the impugned order. Trial Court while allowing the application filed by the plaintiff clearly mentioned that these documents are relevant for the adjudication of the present suit. So, in my considered opinion, trial Court had not committed any error in allowing the application filed by the plaintiff. So, the petition filed by the defendant being bereft of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stand(s) dismissed accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Tahir/299