Petitioner challenged the trial court order via Article 227, seeking trial stay for pending SLP. Court held no adverse order existed against petitioner and thus order did not warrant interference; petition dismissed as a stay application was declared infructuous.
Petition dismissed. Hold harmless application dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~52
Through: Mr.Azam Ansari, Advocate
versus
SANT KAUR .....Respondent Through: Mr.Puneet Aggarwal & Mr.R.B. Singh, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI
O R D E R % 05.05.2017
CM No.17255/2017 & 17253/2017
CM(M) 511/2017
CM(M) 511/2017
Page 1 of 3
“CivDJ/611263/2016 Sant Kaur Vs. Manjeet Singh
04.03.2017
Present: Sh. Puneet Aggarwa & Sh. R.P. Singh, Ld. Counsels for the plaintiff alongwith plaintiff in person.
Sh. M.A. Ansari and Mohmad Imtiyaz, Ld. Counsels for the defendant alongwith Defendant in person.
Ld. Counsel for the defendant filed an application under Section 151 CPC submitting that this court dismissed the application filed by applicant for impleading him as party in the present suit and order dated 27.01.2017 was taken in appeal in CM(M) which was dismissed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide order dated 03.03.2017 and it is further submitted that applicant wants to file SLP and further submitted that evidence may not be started and seeks time for three months. Highly opposed by Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff submitting that the plaintiff is a senior citizen and affidavit in evidence has already been filed on 26.04.2016 and defendant wants to linger on the case.
Heard. Record perused. This is court is of opinion that no prejudice would be caused to the defendant if affidavit in evidence of PW1 is tendered and cross-examination is deferred. Let the affidavit of PW-1 be tendered in evidence and crossexamination be deferred.
Accordingly, application filed by defendant is disposed
of.
It is further submitted by Ld. Counsel for the defendant that list of witnesses has not been filed by plaintiff and he has not received the copy of the same. On the other hand, it is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff that the same has already been filed on 26.04.2016 and copy has already been supplied. It is further submitted by Ld. Counsel for the defendant that list of witnesses filed by plaintiff cannot be taken on record.
Page 2 of 3
CM(M) 511/2017
Heard. As the procedural law is handmaid of justice, list of witnesses filed by plaintiff is taken on record. Copy supplied to Ld. Counsel for the defendant.
Affidavit of witnesses PW-2, PW-3 and PW-4 filed by Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff. Copy supplied to Ld. Counsel for the defendant.
PW-1 Smt. Sant Kaur, is examined in chief and her cross-examination is deferred.
Ld. Counsel for the defendant also filed another application under Section 151 for correction of para 14 of order dated 27.01.2017.
Heard. Put up for orders on the application on 09.03.2017 and put up for cross-examination of PW-1/RPE on 12.05.2017.
Copy of this order be given Dasti to Ld. Counsel for the defendant as prayed for.
Sd/-
CM No.17254/2017 (stay)
Dismissed as infructuous.
MAY 05, 2017/ ‘hkaur’
PRATIBHA RANI, J.
Page 3 of 3
CM(M) 511/2017
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's petition under Article 227 for setting aside the trial court order deserves interference since no adverse order was passed against the petitioner.
Whether the proceedings before the learned Trial Court can be stayed pending filing of Special Leave Petition (SLP).
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Bhoom Singh
Sant Kaur
Pratibha Rani
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 227 of the Constitution invoking the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate civil courts.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
