Admission or denial under CPC applies only to legally admissible documents, not unsigned uncertified copies from another suit.

Unsigned and uncertified copies of documents from another suit cannot be used to compel admission or denial under Order 12 Rule 2 and Order 12 Rule 3A CPC, because the provision applies only to documents that are legally admissible or capable of being legally acted upon. The court reasoned that the procedure is intended to save the cost of proving documents, not to bypass the requirement of first producing proper admissible material. Where originals are not produced, secondary evidence from another judicial record must be in the form permitted by law, namely certified copies; plain copies do not qualify. The article therefore affirms that a party must place admissible documents on record before invoking admission or denial.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether unsigned and uncertified copies of documents from another suit could be put to the opposite party for admission or denial under Order 12 Rule 2 and Order 12 Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: The expression "document" in Order 12 refers to a proper document on which the Court can legally act and which can be legally adduced in evidence. A party cannot be compelled to admit or deny a paper that is not itself in admissible form, because the procedure is meant to save the costs of proving documents, not the costs of procuring or producing inadmissible copies. Where the originals are not produced, secondary evidence of documents from another judicial record is admissible only in the form permitted by law, namely certified copies; plain unsigned copies are not admissible as secondary evidence. The meaning of the provision was read harmoniously with the object of the enactment, and the party was required first to place proper and admissible material before invoking admission or denial.

Conclusion: The application under Order 12 Rule 2 and Order 12 Rule 3A was not maintainable on the basis of unsigned uncertified copies, and the requirement to file certified copies was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The revision failed because no legal or jurisdictional error was shown in the order refusing to compel admission or denial of inadmissible copies.

Ratio Decidendi: A party may call upon the opposite party to admit or deny only a document that is legally admissible or capable of being legally acted upon; uncertified and otherwise inadmissible copies cannot be the subject of such a call.

---