The Court allowed petitioner to place original photographs and documents on record filed with earlier amendment applications despite omission of a specific prayer, imposing a Rs. 10,000 cost on petitioner.
Application to place photographs and documents on record allowed subject to payment of Rs. 10,000 to counsel.
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.
$~26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 334/2019, CM APPL.No.8726/2019 RAMESH KUMAR & ORS
..... Petitioner Through : Mr.Nikhilesh Krishnan, Mr.Jai Pratap, Advocates.
versus
RAJIV SHARMA
..... Respondent Through : Counsel for the respondent appearance not given.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA O R D E R
% 14.05.2019
Two amendment applications were though allowed by the learned Trial Court and though the said amendment applications were accompanied by original photographs of opening of shops M/s.Prince Kids Wear and M/s. Yuva Collection accompanied by other documents but inadvertently the prayer for taking such photographs and documents on record was not mentioned in such applications. An application in this regard was later filed but was dismissed by the impugned order.
Considering the fact the original photographs along with accompanying documents were filed with the amendment applications, the argument of the petitioner appears to be plausible that the application inadvertently did not carry the prayer for taking such documents, including photographs on record; hence the same is
now allowed to be placed on record subject to the cost of Rs.10,000/to be paid to the counsel for the respondent, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of either of the parties in the trial.
The petition stands disposed of. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
YOGESH KHANNA, J.
MAY 14, 2019 DU
2 issues framed by the court
Whether documents mentioned in amendment applications should be allowed on record since the prayer to include them was inadvertently omitted.
Whether the petitioner can be made to pay costs to the respondent counsel for allowing the documents.
RAMESH KUMAR & ORS
RAJIV SHARMA
YOGESH KHANNA
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
