Recall of witness and late document production cannot fill lacunae after evidence closes, SC reiterates.

Order XVIII Rule 17 and Section 151 CPC cannot be used to reopen a closed trial or fill lacunae in a party's case. Where documents were already in the party's possession, were withheld throughout evidence, and no satisfactory explanation was offered for their earlier non-production, a late request to take them on record and recall a witness after evidence had closed and judgment was reserved was not bona fide. The SC held that inherent powers and the recall power are to be exercised sparingly and only to clarify evidence or meet the ends of justice, not to cure negligence. The High Court's order permitting reopening was set aside and refusal of additional evidence was restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether documents not produced during the trial could be taken on record and a witness recalled under Order VII Rule 14, Order XVIII Rule 17 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 after evidence was closed, final arguments heard and judgment reserved.

Analysis: Order XVIII Rule 17 is intended to enable the Court to clarify doubts arising from evidence and is not meant to fill omissions or lacunae in a party's case. The power to recall a witness is to be exercised sparingly and only for appropriate purposes. Section 151 may be invoked to meet the ends of justice or prevent abuse of process, but not to permit a party to cure its own negligence where the documents were all along in its possession and were withheld throughout the trial. Where the application is made after the evidence has closed and judgment is reserved, without a satisfactory explanation for earlier non-production, the request is not bona fide and would defeat the object of expeditious trial.

Conclusion: The applications were not maintainable on the facts, and the order of the High Court permitting production of the documents and recall of the witness was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the trial court's refusal to permit additional evidence was restored, and the respondent was not entitled to reopen the case to fill lacunae in its evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court's inherent powers and the power under Order XVIII Rule 17 cannot be used to allow a party to fill lacunae or improve its case after the close of evidence when the material sought to be introduced was all along within that party's possession and no sufficient explanation for non-production is shown.

---