Dismissed

Ritesh Agarwal and Anr. v. Raj Vikram Singh

Delhi HC18 Dec 2024FAO(OS)/135/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal against the rejection of an application to place additional documents on record, holding it was not maintainable. Liberty was granted to rely on documents while tendering evidence in the underlying suit.

What did the court decide?

Liberty given to tender additional documents as evidence in the underlying suit CS(OS) 474/2019 notwithstanding the dismissal of the appeal.

Ritesh Agarwal and Anr. Vs Raj Vikram Singh — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~9

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- FAO(OS) 135/2024, CM APPL. 57496/2024 –Stay

¶4

RITESH AGARWAL AND ANR .....Appellants Through: Mr. Sameer Dawar, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

RAJ VIKRAM SINGH .....Respondent Through: None.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶8

The present appeal seeks to assail order dated 05.03.2024 passed by the Learned Single Judge in CS(OS) 474/2019. Vide the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has rejected the application filed by the appellants to place on record the additional documents.

¶9

Even though despite service none appears for the respondent, we have proceeded to hear learned counsel for the appellants on the question of the maintainability of the appeal, which in our considered opinion, is not maintainable.

¶10

When faced with this situation, learned counsel for the appellants seeks leave to withdraw the appeal but prays that it may be clarified that the withdrawal of the present appeal will not come in the way of the appellants tendering these additional documents along with their evidence. Taking into account that it has been categorically stated in the plaint that the appellants

¶11

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/12/2024 at 12:49:30

¶12

are persons having a good standing in society and have received a number of awards in both National and International forums, we clarify that the dismissal of the present appeal will not come in the way of the appellants relying on these documents while tendering their evidence in the ongoing suit.

¶13

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not pressed with liberty as prayed for.

¶14

REKHA PALLI, J

¶15

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

¶16

DECEMBER 18, 2024 / bh

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/12/2024 at 12:49:30

Ritesh Agarwal and Anr. v. Raj Vikram Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritesh Agarwal and Anr. v. Raj Vikram Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subhash Chander Bajaj (Since Deceased) Thr Lrs & Ors. Vs Inderjit Bajaj (Since Deceased) Thr Lrs & Ors.

M/S Sonal Developers Private Limited Vs M/S Durga Builders Private Limited and Ors.

Omesh Misra Memoria Charitable Trust Vs Maneesha Tyagi & Ors.

Smt Mehul Singh Ahluwalia Vs Sh. Rishi Verma & Ors.

Sh. Subhash Chandra Jarodia Vs Sh. Vijayinder Kumar & Ors.

Mrs. Punita Bhalla & Ors. Vs Manya Sharma

Cigma Events Private Limited Vs Deepak Gupta & Ors.

Mehr Nigar Vs Aatika Manzar and Ors.

Ashish Chaudhary Vs MD Ashfaq

M/S Satyadhara Communications Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Indiasign Pvt. Ltd.

Subhash Chander Bajaj (Since Deceased) Thr Lrs & Ors. Vs Inderjit Bajaj (Since Deceased) Thr Lrs & Ors.

Dr Manish Bansal Vs Dr Sanjiv Bansal

Fateh Singh Vs Sushila & Anr.

Shri Naresh Kumar (Since Deceased) through Legal Heirs Smt Kusum Srivastava & Ors. Vs Smt Raj Lata Srivastava through Her Special Attorney Shri Soumendra Mahapatra & Ors.