Bombay High Court

SUNITA RAMESH THAKUR WIFE RAMESH THAKUR (DECD)versusBANK OF INDIA

Decided: 5 October 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

Marking documents as exhibits does not ipso facto make them admissible; they become admissible only if proven by leading evidence.

Summary

The petitioner, Sunita Ramesh Thakur, challenged the City Civil Court's order of marking certain documents as exhibits after the closure of evidence, arguing that she was not given an opportunity to file a statement of admission or denial. The petitioner further contended that the documents were treated as admissible without any supporting evidence. The Court clarified that merely marking documents as exhibits does not automatically render them admissible. It held that a trial court may consider such marked documents as evidence only if the party seeking their admission proves their relevance and authenticity by leading evidence. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed without granting any relief.

Issues considered

What is the effect of marking documents as exhibits after the closure of evidence on their admissibility?
Whether the petitioner must be given an opportunity to file a statement of admission or denial before such documents are treated as evidence.

Subjects

evidence
admissibility
exhibits
civil procedure
writ petition
trial court
closure of evidence

Judgment

Renuka Thakur                                             41-WP-1701-2020.docx


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                     WRIT PETITION NO. 1701 OF 2020
Sunita Ramesh Thakur Wife Ramesh                     ...Petitioner
Thakur (Decd)
                     V/s.

Bank Of India                                        ...Respondent
                                ________________
Ms. Divya Menon i/b Bhave and Co., for Petitioner.
                                ________________
                                          CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
                                           DATED: 5 OCTOBER 2026.


P.C.:


1)              Plaintiff’s grievance in the Petition is about the course of
action adopted by the learned Judge of the City Civil Court in marking as
exhibits the documents tendered by it after closure of evidence of P.W. 1.
The Petitioner complains that no opportunity was granted to it for filing
statement on admission/denial. It is also contended that in absence of
any supporting evidence, the documents are straightaway marked as
exhibits.


2)              It is well settled position of law that mere marking the
documents as exhibits does not ipso facto mean that the documents
automatically become admissible in evidence. Therefore, it is clarified
that the Trial Court shall take into consideration the additional



                                    Page No.1 of 2
                                  5 OCTOBER 2026
                          Renuka Thakur                                                 41-WP-1701-2020.docx


                          documents (which are already marked as Exhibits) as admissible in
                          evidence only if Plaintiff proves the said documents by leading evidence.


                          3)              With the above clarification, the Writ Petition is disposed
                          of.


                                                                               [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]




Signed by: Renuka S Thakur
                                                              Page No.2 of 2
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge                         5 OCTOBER 2026
Date: 06/10/2026 18:55:22

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

Divya Menon