Amarjeet Singh Bammi & Anr. vs. Master Fatehvir Singh (Minor) & Ors.

Facts

This matter concerns an application filed by Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 (Applicants) seeking a direction for the Appellants to file the entire record of M/s G S Service Station Petrol Pump. The underlying civil suit involved directions from the learned Single Judge for the Defendant (Appellant) to produce specific documents. These directions were modified by a Co-ordinate Bench on 24.01.2024. The modification allowed the Appellants to file the record concerning the petrol pump with the Court's Registry within one week. Respondent No. 2, along with their lawyer and a Chartered Accountant, would have access to this record. Respondent No. 2 was also required to file an undertaking that the information gleaned would be used solely for the present litigation. The Applicants now contend that the Appellants have deliberately filed incomplete documents, failing to produce crucial financial and transactional records for various financial years, including ITR, Balance Sheet, Audit Report, and monthly HPCL transactions.

Held

The Court disposed of the application with the observation that if the Applicant/Defendant has failed to produce certain documents despite directions of the Court, the law shall take its own course. The Court explicitly stated that no further directions were considered necessary at this stage. The ratio decidendi is that the Court will not issue further specific directions for document production when a party has allegedly failed to comply with previous orders; instead, the consequences of non-compliance will be determined by the applicable law. The operative direction was to dispose of the application with the aforementioned observation, leaving the determination of the consequences of non-compliance to the legal framework.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellants have complied with the directions of the Court dated 24.01.2024 to file the entire record concerning G.S. Service Station Petrol Pump, specifically regarding the production of documents listed in Para 13 of the application. Contentions: Petitioner/Appellant: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the Appellants regarding their compliance or non-compliance with the order dated 24.01.2024. Their initial stance, as recorded in the order dated 23.01.2024, was to be satisfied if access to the records was given to the respondents and their CA, and if the respondent filed an undertaking. Revenue/State: The Respondents contend that the Appellants have misused the Court's order and deliberately filed incomplete documents. They specifically list several documents (ITR for FY 2022-2023, Balance Sheet for year ending 31.03.2023, Audit Report for year ending 31.03.2023, monthly transaction of HPCL from November, 2019 to March 2020, Bank Statement, Cash Book, General Ledger, Journal Book, Purchase Book, Sales Book, Bank Book, GST Challans, PPF Challans for various financial years) that have not been filed by the Appellants.