Rohit Gupta v. Seema & Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner withdrew CM(M) 235/2016. Court noted provisions regarding secondary evidence being available during cross-examination. Prayer dismissed.
What did the court decide?
The petition was dismissed as withdrawn.
What the court decided
$~27
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 235/2016 ROHIT GUPTA
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. J.K. Chawla, Adv.
SEEMA & ORS
versus ..... Respondents Through None.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
O R D E R
% 11.03.2016 CM(M) 235/2016 & C.M. No.8888/2016 & C.M. No.8889/2016
Learned counsel for the petitioner after some arguments does not
press this petition. Needless to state that at the time when the secondary evidence is led, all objections sought to be urged before this Court at this stage will be permitted to the petitioner/defendant No. 1 during the cross-examination of the witnesses who tender the secondary evidence.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Rohit Gupta
- respondent
Seema & Ors
Coram
Indermeet Kaur
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court