The High Court of Delhi, in an appeal, held that a suit previously dismissed for non-prosecution should be restored upon payment of costs by the appellant. The suit was lifted to be listed for further trial proceedings.
The suit dismissed for non-prosecution on 09.09.2016 is restored and listed for further trial proceedings.
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.
$~25
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA O R D E R % 06.02.2017
We have heard the counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff has brought a Demand Draft bearing no. 923037 of Rs. 50,000/-, drawn on Indian Bank, Service Branch (Delhi), dated 03.02.2017, in favour of Rajeshwari Devi (the respondent herein). The said amount is by way of costs. The learned counsel for the respondent accepts the same.
After hearing counsel for the parties, we are of the view that suit which was earlier dismissed for non-prosecution on 09.09.2016, be restored.
It is ordered accordingly. The suit be now listed before the learned Single Judge on 20.02.2017 to complete the proceedings of trial inasmuch as part cross examination of the plaintiff’s witnesses were conducted, the trial shall proceed from there onwards.
The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J
J.R. MIDHA, J
FEBRUARY 06, 2017/kb
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a suit dismissed for non-prosecution can be restored upon payment of costs.
Mukesh Aggarwal
Rajeshwari Devi
Badar Durrez Ahmed
J.R. Midha
As recorded by the court registry
An appeal to a Division Bench against an order made by a single judge on the original side of the High Court.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
