摘要： 我国民事诉讼中的文书提出义务，应采取限定主义。原则上应当以实体法上的文书提出请求权为依据。民事诉讼法可以作出必要的补充规定，允许诉讼中引用过的文书、利益文书和法律关系文书作为义务文书的范围，明确文书提出义务命令的申请和审查程序，强化不履行文书提出义务命令的法律后果。

关键词: 民事诉讼, 举证责任, 书证, 文书提出义务, 案件解明义务

Abstract: Documents, which belong to documentary evidence, play an important role in revealing facts in civil proceedings.But according to the principle of the party producing evidence and proving facts, while documents are in possession of the opposite party, the possessor is unwilling to put forward them and let the certifier get them because these documents may be detrimental to the possessor or the cost of producing documents is high.Thus evidence can not be discovered in debate procedure and judgment can not be made on the basis of enough facts.On the other hand, although the party possessing documents can be compelled to put forward documents by law from the idea of finding truth and achieving equity in litigation information, this method without restriction may damage many rights of the possessor, affect normal operation related to the processor's affairs, and deny the parties' burden of producing evidence.Therefore, the duty of producing documents must be limited and case specific in principle.Even though there are legal provisions about the duty of producing documentary evidence in the Interpretations on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law at present, express restrictive provisions are missing, and there also lacks corresponding procedure of application, trial, adjudication and relief, which influences the legitimacy and effectiveness of this institution's operation.This thesis carries out relatively detailed and indepth research on the basic framework, the scope of documents and procedural problems of the duty of producing documents.The research of this thesis is believed to have great reference value for the institutional construction and practice of the party's duty of producing documents in our country's civil action.

Key words: Civil Procedure, Burden of Producing Evidence, Documentary Evidence, Duty of Producing Documents, Disclosure Obligation of Case