Disposed¶22

Himani v. Akshay Gupta & Anr.

Delhi HC24 Jul 2025CM(M)/1338/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court, CM(M) 1338/2025, Manoj Jain J., 24 July 2025; divorce proceedings; supply of electronic evidence copy; pendrive Ex. PW1/4 tendered with affidavit; request for softcopy/DVD of media file for cross-examination; direction to Trial Court official to provide DVD; cost/expenditure borne by seeking party; application within one week; cross-examination fixed 14.08.2025; petition and pending application disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petition and pending application disposed of with direction to the learned Trial Court to have its official provide a DVD of Ex. PW1/4 to the petitioner upon her application (to be made within one week), expenditure to be borne by the petitioner, and the DVD to be furnished well in advance of the cross-examination fixed for 14.08.2025. ¶22

Himani Vs Akshay Gupta & Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner/wife is entitled to be supplied the softcopy (DVD) of the media file contained in the pendrive Ex. PW1/4 filed by her husband with his affidavit, so that she can effectively cross-examine him.

¶14

Court's answer

Without going into whether the pendrive had earlier been supplied, the Court disposed of the petition by directing the learned Trial Court to direct its official to provide a DVD of Ex. PW1/4, on the condition that the expenditure is borne by the petitioner.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner was to make the application within one week, and the Trial Court was to ensure the requisite DVD was provided to her in advance so that the cross-examination of the respondent could proceed on the date fixed (14.08.2025).

¶21

Key takeaways

Even if the softcopy had already been supplied and misplaced by the petitioner, it could be provided again, subject to her bearing the requisite expenditure.obiter¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Manoj Jain, J., oral judgment, 24.07.2025) in CM(M) 1338/2025 — Himani v. Akshay Gupta & Anr.: Wife defending husband's divorce petition sought supply of the softcopy of the media file in the pendrive Ex. PW1/4 (filed by the husband with his affidavit) to enable effective cross-examination. Without adjudicating whether the pendrive had earlier been supplied, the Court disposed of the petition, directing the Trial Court to provide a DVD of the exhibit on the petitioner bearing the expenditure; application within one week; DVD to be delivered well in advance of the cross-examination scheduled for 14.08.2025.

¶1

$~83

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 24^th July, 2025

¶4

- CM(M) 1338/2025 & CM APPL. 44078/2025

¶5

HIMANI .....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. A.K. Tripathi and Mr. Abhishek Rawat, Advocates

¶7

versus

¶8

AKSHAY GUPTA & ANR. .....Respondent

¶9

Through: None

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

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

¶12

Petitioner is defending a petition filed by her husband whereby he seeks divorce.

¶13

The grievance and the limited request of the petitioner/wife is to the effect that she has yet not received the pendrive which her husband had filed when he tendered his affidavit in the Court.

¶14

The pendrive has been referred to as Ex. PW1/4 (collectively with the transcription) and according to petitioner, she would not be able to effectively cross-examine her husband, unless the softcopy of the media file which is, reportedly, contained in pendrive is also supplied to her.

¶15

The request of this kind could have, easily, been made by her before the learned Trial Court itself.

¶16

Even if softcopy of the media in question had already been supplied to the petitioner and had been, somehow, misplaced by her, it could be again provided, albeit , subject to her bearing the requisite expenditure in this regard.

¶17

CM(M) 1338/2025 1

¶18

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 6.07.2025 14:37:58

¶19

During course of the arguments, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is ready to bear the cost in this regard.

¶20

Next date before the learned Trial Court is stated to be 14.08.2025 for cross-examination of respondent herein and in order to avoid any further delay in the matter and without going into the fact whether the pendrive was earlier supplied or not, the present petition is disposed with direction to learned Trial Court to direct its official to provide DVD of the aforesaid exhibit on the condition that expenditure in this regard shall be borne by the petitioner herein.

¶21

Let application to that effect be made within one week from today and the learned Trial Court would accordingly direct that the requisite DVD be provided to her, well-in-advance so that the cross-examination of respondent herein also takes place on the date fixed i.e. 14.08.2025.

¶22

Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶23

Pending application also stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶24

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

¶25

JULY 24, 2025/ dr/shs

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

CM(M) 1338/2025 2

¶28

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:2 6.07.2025 14:37:58

Himani v. Akshay Gupta & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Himani v. Akshay Gupta & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Singh & Ors. Vs Sushil Kumar & Ors.

Avnish Bansal Vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain

Sheela Foam Limited Vs the New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Rajesh Gupta Vs Pushpa Jain

Vijay Kumar Vs Mahinder Singh

Union of India Vs Mr. Mohan Lal Wadhwa

Mrs. Ruchika Mandhwani & Anr. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Ashok Katyal and Anr. Vs Ashish Tikoo

Rakesh Singh & Ors. Vs Sushil Kumar & Ors.

Avnish Bansal Vs Sanjeev Kumar Jain

Surya Prakash Vs Smt Krishna Gaur

M/S Simplex Infrastructure Ltd. & Ors. Vs Dry Mix Co. (Plaxit) Llc

Narayan Sewa Samiti Vs Millennium Education Management Pvt. Ltd.

Saurabh Behal Vs Aarushi Sachdeva