Requisition under Order XIII Rule 10: receiving court cannot test legality or relevancy of documents at the compliance stage.

A court receiving a requisition under Order XIII, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot examine the validity, legality, or relevancy of the documents sought once the request is validly made by the requisitioning authority acting as a court. Objections about lawfulness, prior settlement, or the period of the account books must be taken before the income-tax authorities or in later proceedings, not at the stage of compliance by the receiving court. The text also states that a search-warrant proceeding under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act is a judicial proceeding within the rule, so the requisition did not fail on that ground. The restrictive order was set aside and transmission of the documents was directed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a court receiving a requisition under Order XIII, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure could examine the validity, legality, or relevancy of the documents sought by the Income-tax Officer; (ii) Whether the proceeding connected with the issue of a search warrant under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was a suit or proceeding within Order XIII, Rule 10.

Issue (i): Whether a court receiving a requisition under Order XIII, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure could examine the validity, legality, or relevancy of the documents sought by the Income-tax Officer.

Analysis: The requisition had been issued by the Income-tax Officer while assessment proceedings were pending, and the court to whom the request was addressed was not concerned at that stage with whether the documents could otherwise be lawfully obtained, whether there had been an earlier settlement, or whether the account books related to an earlier period. The affected party could raise such objections before the income-tax authorities or in further proceedings, but the receiving court had no discretion to test the requisition on merits once it was validly made by the requisitioning authority acting as a court.

Conclusion: The court below was not entitled to scrutinize the validity or legality of the requisition, and its restrictive order was unsustainable.

Issue (ii): Whether the proceeding connected with the issue of a search warrant under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was a suit or proceeding within Order XIII, Rule 10.

Analysis: The issue of a search warrant by a Magistrate is a judicial act requiring satisfaction on judicial materials and therefore constitutes a judicial proceeding. Even apart from that, Order XIII, Rule 10 refers to any suit or proceeding, so the requisition did not fail merely because the Magistrate's function arose in a search-warrant matter under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act.

Conclusion: The search-warrant proceeding fell within the scope of Order XIII, Rule 10, and the requisition was valid.

Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded, the restrictive order was set aside, and the documents were directed to be transmitted to the Income-tax Officer with consequential directions for their return in accordance with the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: A court receiving a requisition under Order XIII, Rule 10 cannot go behind a valid request by another court or statutory authority acting as a court and cannot refuse compliance by examining collateral questions of admissibility, legality, or relevancy at that stage.

---