Disposed

Anju Bala Arora v. Tapan Mudgal & Ors.

Delhi HC28 Oct 2024CM(M)/2436/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition by plaintiff challenging trial court order dismissing waiver of Rs.15,000 cost and closing her evidence. Court granted one final opportunity to lead remaining evidence, cost modified payable to defendant on next date.

What did the court decide?

One last and final opportunity granted to plaintiff to lead remaining evidence; cost of Rs.15,000 payable to defendant on next date.

Anju Bala Arora Vs Tapan Mudgal & Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~90

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 28^th October, 2024

¶4

- CM(M) 2436/2024

¶5

ANJU BALA ARORA .....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Raghav, Advocate. (through V.C.)

¶7

versus

¶8

TAPAN MUDGAL & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Parmod Kumar Singhal with Mr.Rahul Singhal, Advocates. (through V.C.)

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶11

CM APPL. 63634/2024 (early hearing)

¶12

The application has been moved on behalf of the petitioner seeking early hearing of the matter.

¶13

Since the issue involved is very short and concise and since learned counsel for the respondents has also joined the proceedings through video conferencing, with the consent of the parties, the matter, as such, has been taken up.

¶14

3. The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶15

CM(M) 2436/2024

¶16

The petitioner herein is plaintiff before the learned Trial Court.

¶17

Signature Not Verified

¶18

CM(M) 2436/2024

¶19

¶20

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 9.10.2024 11:32:45

¶21

The plaintiff was permitted to lead remaining evidence subject to cost of Rs.15,000/-. He was given last opportunity to produce her evidence on 09.10.2023. However, on 09.10.2023, instead, an application was moved seeking waiver of the cost and such application was dismissed by the learned Trial Court and, straightway, the case was fixed for defendant’s evidence.

¶22

Such order is under challenge.

¶23

During course of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner (plaintiff) states that it was a legal aid matter and it was only on account of financial constraint that the cost could not be arranged and now, as per the instructions, the plaintiff is ready to clear the cost and, therefore, it is prayed that one last and final opportunity be granted to her to lead evidence before the learned Trial Court.

¶24

Learned counsel for the respondent/defendant has also joined the proceedings through video conferencing and states that though the defendant has already led his evidence, without prejudice to his rights and contentions, he would have no objection if one last and final opportunity is granted to the petitioner to lead remaining evidence.

¶25

The next date before the learned Trial Court is stated to be 19.11.2024 for final arguments.

¶26

Keeping in mind the overall facts of the case and also appreciating that the plaintiff, who happens to be a lady, could not arrange for cost of Rs.15,000/- and was compelled to seek legal aid and

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

CM(M) 2436/2024

¶29

¶30

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 9.10.2024 11:32:45

¶31

also keeping in mind the gracious concession given by Sh. Parmod Kumar Singhal, learned counsel for the respondent, the present petition is disposed of with the directions that the plaintiff is given one last and final opportunity to examine his remaining witnesses, on a date, to be fixed in this regard by the learned Trial Court.

¶32

It is, however, expected that the petitioner would ensure that the advance copy of the affidavits of the witnesses whom she wishes to examine are duly supplied to Sh. Singhal, learned counsel for the defendant/defendant within two weeks from today. If she wishes to examine any official witness, an application in this regard would be filed before the learned Trial, well in advance, so that the learned Trial Court takes up the above said application and issue summons to all such witnesses whose testimony it considers to be relevant in the context of the issues raised before the learned Trial Court.

¶33

The order of cost of Rs.15,000/- is modified to the extent that such entire cost would now go to the defendant and such cost be cleared on the next date fixed before the learned Trial Court.

¶34

Sh. Raghav, learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff states that one Mr. Gaurav Arora (son of the plaintiff) would enter into witness box on behalf of the plaintiff and no other ‘private witness’ would be examined and he would ensure that even the list of official witness is pruned down, to the extent possible.

¶35

It is also informed that when the case was at the stage of defendant’s evidence, the plaintiff could not cross-examine such

¶36

Signature Not Verified

¶37

CM(M) 2436/2024

¶38

¶39

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 9.10.2024 11:32:45

¶40

witness and his right to cross-examine defendant’s witness was also closed. However, such order is not the subject matter of the present petition but, at the same time, it is clarified that it will be always open to the plaintiff to move appropriate application seeking recall of the above said order and the learned Trial Court would consider any such application, if moved, in accordance with law.

¶41

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶42

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

¶43

OCTOBER 28, 2024/st

¶44

Signature Not Verified

¶45

Digitally Signed CM(M) 2436/2024 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 9.10.2024 11:32:45

¶46

Anju Bala Arora v. Tapan Mudgal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anju Bala Arora v. Tapan Mudgal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babli Pandey Vs Mukut Lal Sharma & Ors.

Manish Gupta Vs National Insurance Company Limited

Amaterasu Foods Pvt. Ltd. through Its Director Vs Brajesh Kumar Prop of M/S Kumar Interiors

M/S Electronic Planet Vs New India Assurance Company Limited through Its Branch Manager & Anr.

M/S Tdi Infrastructure Limited Vs Supreet Kaur & Ors.

M/S. Sonam Furniture Vs Wood Tech Consultants Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Abhishek Kumar Vs M G Mobile India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. & Anr.

Harish Katyal Vs Pawan Kumar Dhawan & Ors.

Babli Pandey Vs Mukut Lal Sharma & Ors.

Manish Gupta Vs National Insurance Company Limited

Virender Beniwal and Ors. Vs Surender Singh and Ors.

Binesh Khatri Vs Pooja

Kanhiya Lal Prakesh Kumar Vs Ajm Housing Pvt. Ltd.

Korra Worldwide Advertising Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ht Digital Streams Limited