[2026:RJ-JP:22230] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9327/2026 Hariom Gupta Son Of Shri Sunnaram Gupta, Aged About 61 Years, Resident Of Ambar Milk Dairy, Kota (Rajasthan) Through Power Of Attorney Holder Shri Shiv Singh, Son Of Shri Madho Singh, Resident Of Plot No. 73, D Block, Salasar City, Niwaru, Jhotwara, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner/Plaintiff Versus 1. Anant Son Of Shri Jagdish Bagda, Resident Of Plot No. A- 34, Sain Colony, Power House Road, Police Station Sadar, Jaipur. Office G-04, Vinoba Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur. 2. Ramesh Sharma, Son Of Shri Lallu Ram Sharma, Resident Of Plot No. A-34, Sain Colony, Power House Road, Police Station Sadar, Jaipur. Office G-04, Vinoba Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur. ----Respondents/Defendants For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anurag Pareek For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIPIN GUPTA Judgment / Order 26/05/2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed assailing the order dated 27.02.2026, passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate No. 4, Jaipur Metropolitan I, in Civil Suit No. 12/2025, whereby the application of the defendants- respondents under Order VIII Rule 1(3) CPC has been allowed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the documents are merely photocopies and are not relevant for the purpose of adjudication of the dispute. Learned counsel further submits that the learned Trial Court has committed illegality in [2026:RJ-JP:22230] (2 of 2) [CW-9327/2026] allowing the application of the defendants-respondents under Order VIII Rule 1(3) CPC. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the documents are inadmissible in evidence and, therefore, cannot be permitted to be taken on record. 4. Heard. 5. This Court finds that, at the stage of taking documents on record by the learned Trial Court, it is not necessary to examine whether the documents are admissible or inadmissible in evidence. Such objections regarding admissibility or inadmissibility can be raised only after the documents are taken on record and tendered in evidence. 6. Hence, this Court finds no error warranting interference in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 7. Accordingly, the present Civil Writ Petition stand dismissed. 8. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (BIPIN GUPTA),J KRATIKA/4