LexStreakRead free →
Supreme Court of India· 07 August 2026

Under Order XIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, when can a court reject a document that has already been marked as an exhibit at trial?

S. SANGEETHA & ORS v. TMT. P. PONNI
2026 INSC 813 · SLP (C) No. 26326 of 2024
Coram: Sanjay Karol; Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow Order XIII Rule 3 Code of Civil …📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

Only where the document is prima facie inadmissible in law or irrelevant to the properties or matters in issue in the suit. An objection that merely questions the weight or genuineness of an already-marked document does not meet this threshold and must be examined later, not used to exclude the document at this stage.

Headnote

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order XIII Rule 3 — Rejection of documents — Marking as exhibit not proof of contents — Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order XIII Rule 3 — Threshold rejection of documents — Held: A document already marked and exhibited during trial cannot be rejected at the threshold under Order XIII Rule 3 CPC unless it is prima facie inadmissible in law or irrelevant to the matters in issue; an objection that goes only to its evidentiary weight must be examined at the final hearing, not screened out midway. (¶9) Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — Proof of documents — Marking as exhibit distinct from proof of contents — Held further: Marking a document as an exhibit, even without objection, only records its production; it does not amount to proof of its contents, which must still be established through primary or secondary evidence in accordance with law. (¶11) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order XIII Rule 3 — Objections on admissibility to be decided at final judgment — Held further: Following the deferred-objection procedure for evidence-stage disputes, an objection to admissibility should ordinarily be noted and the document tentatively marked, leaving the court to rule on admissibility only while deciding the case finally; premature exclusion at the threshold defeats this object. Appeal dismissed. (¶10, 13)

In the Court's own words
Paragraph 9We find no reason to interfere with the reasoning of the Courts below. The Single Judge has rightly eschewed the documents wherein xerox copies were filed in place of originals, without any explanation thereto. That apart, the objections raised to the other documents marked and exhibited are not such which make the documents prima facie inadmissible in law or irrelevant to the properties involved in the present suit. Consequently, exercise of power under Order XIII Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 by this Court is not warranted in this case.
Acts & Sections
Order XIII Rule 3 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of S. SANGEETHA & ORS v. TMT. P. PONNI — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Does marking a document as an exhibit during the trial of a civil suit amount to proof of the contents of that document?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections