Allowed

Hari Singh Yadav and Anr. v. Ram Kumar Gupta Deceased through Lr.

Delhi HC19 Jul 2024CM(M)/2946/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petitioner petitioned the High Court challenging the trial court 's refusal to permit the examination of a witness named Mr. Subhash and an MCD official in a civil suit. The High Court allowed a limited exemption for the examination of Mr. Subhash on a specific date, subject to trial court directions.

What did the court decide?

Exemption allowed for examination of witness Mr. Subhash on 31.07.2024 subject to no further opportunity being granted.

Hari Singh Yadav and Anr. Vs Ram Kumar Gupta… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~60

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of decision: 19^th July, 2024

¶4

- CM(M) 2946/2024

¶5

HARI SINGH YADAV AND ANR

¶6

.....Petitioner

¶7

Through: Mr. Vikram Saini and Mr. Chitranjan Kumar, Advocate (through V.C.).

¶8

versus

¶9

RAM KUMAR GUPTA DECEASED THROUGH LR.

¶10

.....Respondent

¶11

Through: Mr. Sunil Dutt Dixit and Mr. Shashwat Dixit, Advocates (M-9312832910 & 8376000209) (E-mail: [email protected])

¶12

CORAM:

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

¶14

J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶15

CM APPL. 40106/2024 (Exemption)

¶16

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶17

CM(M) 2946/2024 & CM APPL. 40105/2024 (Stay)

¶18

Mr. Sunil Dixit, learned counsel for the respondent has joined through Video Conferencing.

¶19

Mr. Shashwat Dixit, associate of Mr. Sunil Dixit is present in Court.

¶20

The petitioners are defendants before the learned Trial Court and have impugned order dated 10.05.2024 and 31.05.2024.

¶21

When the case was at the stage of defendant’s evidence, the learned Trial Court declined them to examine one official from MCD. This is

¶22

CM(M) 2946/2024 1

¶23

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 0.07.2024 17:06:05

¶24

reflected in impugned order dated 10.05.2024.

¶25

When the matter was taken up by the learned Trial Court on 31.05.2024, the defendants submitted evidence by way of affidavit of one Mr. Subhash. His name figured in the list of witnesses submitted way back in the year 2019. However, tendering of such affidavit was objected to by the plaintiff on the ground that said witness could not have been examined without the permission of the Court. The permission to examine him has also been declined by the learned Trial Court.

¶26

This is how the petitioners are before us.

¶27

During the course of the consideration, Mr. Vikram Saini, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he confines his petition only with respect to the examination of Mr. Subhash and does not insist for the examination of the MCD official.

¶28

He submits that there is no intention to delay the matter in any manner whatsoever and the next date before the learned Trial Court is 31.07.2024 and on that day itself, said witness Mr. Subhash, if permitted, would appear for recording of his evidence. He also states that he would have no objection if the learned Trial Court, subject to its convenience, also starts hearing final arguments same day.

¶29

During the course of the hearing, Mr. Sunil Dixit states that without prejudice to his rights and contention, he would have no objection if the aforesaid limited accommodation is granted to the petitioner.

¶30

Keeping in mind the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the concession given by Mr. Dixit and in the interest of justice, the present petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶31

a. On the next date before the learned Trial Court i.e. on

¶32

CM(M) 2946/2024 2

¶33

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 0.07.2024 17:06:05

¶34

31.07.2024, the defendants would produce Mr. Subhash for the purpose of his examination/ cross examination. It is made clear that no further opportunity would be given to them for examination of said Mr. Subhash on any ground whatsoever. b. If for reason, not attributable to defendants, said witness is not examined on 31.07.2024, learned Trial Court would be well within its right to grant them one more effective opportunity for said limited purpose.

¶35

c. After the cross-examination is over, it will be up to the learned Trial Court to consider whether it can take up the matter for final arguments on same day or not.

¶36

Needless to say, both the sides would come prepared for the purposes of final arguments as well. This direction is being made as it is noticed that the said matter is one of the oldest 20 matters pending on the board of learned Trial Court.

¶37

Petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶38

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

¶39

JULY 19, 2024/ss

¶40

CM(M) 2946/2024 3

¶41

Signature Not Verified

¶42

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 0.07.2024 17:06:05

Hari Singh Yadav and Anr. v. Ram Kumar Gupta Deceased through Lr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hari Singh Yadav and Anr. v. Ram Kumar Gupta Deceased through Lr.

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

Jubeda Begum Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Vijay Vardhan Daga Vs M/S Lord Builders Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Vanita Bathla Vs Shashi Bajaj & Anr.

Reeta Lalwani Vs Delhi Development Authority and Ors.

M/S. Goyal and Goel Stainless Steels and Anr. Vs M/S. Krishi Rasayan Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Smt. Sudesh Anil Vs Shri Anil Arora & Ors.

Nisha Sharma Vs Siddharth Sharma

Mr Vineet Bhutani Vs Mrs Nadiya Mehra

Jubeda Begum Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Vijay Vardhan Daga Vs M/S Lord Builders Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Vanita Bathla Vs Shashi Bajaj & Anr.

Ramin Kumar Mittal Vs Brij Dwivedi

Sonia Venugopal & Anr. Vs Taani Kapoor

M/S Red Apple Vs Dev Bhoomi Cold Chain Private Limited