There shall be an endorsement on every document which has been admitted in evidence in suit, number and title of the suit, name of the person producing document, the date on which it was produced and a statement of its having been so admitted. The endorsement shall be signed or initialled by Judge. Trial Court having a statutory duty to comply with such mandatory provisions. 

Defendant produced 16 documents. Order of trial Court disclosed that documents marked with consent. Considering fact that documents admitted and marked with consent, the trial Court ought to have endorsed the same and allowed it to be relied upon. However, documents admitted in evidence were not endorsed in terms of O. 13, R. 4.  In absence of endorsement, the trial Court refused to look into documents and concluded that no documents produced by defendants and decreed eviction suit in favour of plaintiffs. 

Mandatory provision of the law was not adhered to by the trial Court. Breach of statutory duty occasioned in grave miscarriage of justice. Documents tendered and admitted in evidence in trial Court not properly endorsed, not signed by the trial judge, perplexing to the appellate court to decide if the document was admitted or not. 

Since the trial of the case not conducted per the law, the order of the trial Court decreeing eviction suit in favour of the plaintiff set aside. The matter remanded back to the trial Court for fresh consideration.
 

Appearing Counsel/s : Sri M. Shivaprakash, Sri B. N. Ananthanarayana