Allowed

Daoo Dayal Ajmera v. Jitendra Dhanajibhai Shan and Ors.

Bombay HC27 Mar 2014WP/633/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge allowed a writ petition seeking setting aside of a no-cross and no-evidence order. The court set aside the challenged order, directed the trial court to allow cross-examination, and expedited the pending suit to be decided by December 31, 2014.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; application Exhibit-115 allowed; directions issued for cross-examination, recording of evidence, and deadline of 31st December 2014.

Daoo Dayal Ajmera Vs Jitendra Dhanajibhai Shan… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

WP.633.2011.911.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 633 OF 2011

¶4

Daoo Dayal Ajmera } Petitioner versus Jitendra Dhanjibhai Shah } and Ors. } Respondents

¶5

Mr. Sandesh Deshpande for the Petitioner. Mr. Vishwajeet V. Mohite for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

¶6

CORAM :- R. M. SAVANT, J. DATED :- MARCH 27, 2014

¶7

P.C. :-

¶8

The Writ Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked against the order dated 16^th November, 2010 passed by the learned 6^th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane, by which order, the application Exhibit115, filed by the Defendant, for setting aside the no-cross order, came to be rejected. By the said application, the Petitioner/Defendant had, apart from seeking the setting aside of the no-cross order, also sought the setting aside of no-evidence order passed against him. The reason for rejecting the application is that the said order came to be passed in view of a common order passed below Exhibit-112 and 113 that in spite of opportunity granted the Defendant did not cross examine the Plaintiffs' witnesses.

¶9

The above Petition has been pending in this Court since the year 2011. The Suit in question is of the year 1998 being Regular Civil

¶10

Page 1 of 2

¶11

J.V.Salunke,PA

¶12

WP.633.2011.911.doc

¶13

Suit No. 65 of 1998. the learned Counsel appearing for the parties state that there is one more Suit being Special Civil Suit No. 551 of 2009 between the same parties, which is filed for declaration and injunction, whereas, the present Suit is also filed for declaration and injunction. The learned Counsel appearing for the parties are therefore agreeable to the impugned order dated 16^th November, 2010 being setting aside and the following directions being issued:-

¶14

(i) On the impugned order being set aside, the application Exhibit-115 would stand allowed. Resultantly, the no-cross order as well as the no-evidence order against the Petitioner/Defendant would stand set aside.

¶15

(ii) The Defendant would be entitled to cross-examine the witness of the Plaintiffs and also lead his own evidence. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner Shri. Deshpande states that the Defendant would be examining only two witnesses. The statement is accepted.

¶16

(iii) The trial Court to fix the schedule for recording of evidence i.e. cross-examination of the Plaintiffs' witness and the evidence of the Defendant.

¶17

(iv) Since the Suit is of the year 1998, the hearing of the said Suit is expedited as also the hearing of the other Suit being Special Civil Suit No. 551 of 2009. The concerned Court to hear and decide the said Suits as expeditiously as possible and insofar as the Regular Civil Suit No. 65 of 1998 is concerned, the same to be decided latest by 31^st December, 2014.

¶18

(v) The Petitioner to pay costs of Rs. 3,000/- to the Respondents.

¶19

With the aforesaid directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶20

(R. M. SAVANT, J.)

¶21

Page 2 of 2

¶22

J.V.Salunke,PA

Daoo Dayal Ajmera v. Jitendra Dhanajibhai Shan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Daoo Dayal Ajmera v. Jitendra Dhanajibhai Shan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Jagannath Bapu Sid Vs Shri. Ramchandra Biru Sid (Since Decd) by Lrs and Ors.

Sau. Shakuntala Rajgopal Bang Vs Shri. Kirtikumar Vinodchandra Mehta and Ors.

Shri. Ramchandra Biru Sid (Since Decd) through Lrs Vs Shri. Jagnnatha Bapu Sid

Shri. Vijay Rajarm Patil and Anr. Vs Shivaji Ananda Bhosale and Ors.

Kumari Rekha Dharmarao @ Vaibhav Patil Vs Vijaykumar Chhaganlal Bedmutha and Ors.

Mr Dinesh Kumar Chunilal Jain Vs Ismail Mohammed Lakdawalla and Anr.