Relevance of document summons in civil recovery suits limits discovery to issues directly needed for trial.

Documents sought in a civil recovery suit must be relevant to the adjudication of the pending claim and cannot be compelled merely to investigate the plaintiff's financial transactions or support collateral proceedings. The court held that the defendant's request under Order XVI Rule 1 CPC was outside the proper scope of the suit, especially where the materials were sought for purposes beyond direct trial of the recovery action. It also noted that the impugned order rejecting summoning of documents was not appealable under Order XLIII Rule 1 CPC. The refusal to summon the documents was therefore maintained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the defendant was entitled to summon the plaintiff's documents under Order XVI Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in support of the defence in a suit for recovery, and whether the impugned order rejecting that request called for interference.

Analysis: The request for production was examined against the nature of the suit and the purpose for which the documents were sought. The Court noted that the suit was a simple recovery action and that the documents were being pursued primarily for investigation into the plaintiff's financial transactions and for collateral proceedings, rather than for direct adjudication of the recovery claim. The Court also noted that the power of investigation under Section 11C of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 rests with the Securities and Exchange Board of India, and that the operation of the defendant's letters had already been stayed by the Calcutta High Court. The Court further held that the impugned order passed on the application under Order XVI Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was not an appealable order under Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Conclusion: The defendant was not entitled to have the documents summoned in the manner sought, and the refusal to interfere with the Joint Registrar's order was justified.

Final Conclusion: The chamber appeal failed and the order dismissing the application for summoning of documents stood maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: Documents sought in a civil suit must be relevant to the adjudication of the suit itself and cannot be compelled for investigation or collateral proceedings beyond the scope of the pending trial.

---