Dismissed¶15

Cottage Industries Exposition Ltd. v. Gopal Das Estates and Housing Pvt. Ltd.

Delhi HC14 Oct 2025CM(M)/1985/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of petition; CM(M) 1985/2025; Cottage Industries Exposition Ltd v Gopal Das Estates and Housing Pvt Ltd; Delhi High Court; Girish Kathpalia J.; order dated 28.04.2025; trial court dismissal of application to examine all defence witnesses; chief affidavits not filed; DW1 cross-examination continuation; ex-parte defendant; concealment of ex-parte status; closed defence evidence; application for setting aside ex-parte to be decided on merits; dismissed as withdrawn; accompanying CM APPLs 64483-64487/2025.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petition permitted to be withdrawn unconditionally, with a protective clarification that the order shall not preclude decision on merits of the pending application for setting aside ex-parte. ¶15

Cottage Industries Exposition Ltd. Vs Gopal Das Estates and Housing Pvt. Ltd. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned trial court's order dated 28.04.2025 dismissing the petitioner/defendant's application for permission to examine all defendant's witnesses was assailable (raised by the petition, but not adjudicated as the petition was withdrawn).

¶10

Ratio / Principle

At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant, made on instructions after disclosure that the petitioner had concealed its ex-parte status and closure of defence evidence, the petition and the accompanying applications were dismissed as withdrawn unconditionally.

¶15

Key takeaways

It was clarified at the request of the petitioner's counsel that the present dismissal-as-withdrawn order shall not stand in the way of the petitioner/defendant's pending application for setting aside ex-parte, and that application shall be decided on merits.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Girish Kathpalia, J.), CM(M) 1985/2025, decided 14.10.2025: The petitioner/defendant had challenged the trial court's order dated 28.04.2025 dismissing its application for permission to examine all defence witnesses, an application rejected principally because chief affidavits of witnesses other than DW1 (already under cross-examination) had not been filed, while continuation of DW1's cross-examination was permitted. After discussion of about 30 minutes, it was disclosed on behalf of the respondent/plaintiff that the petitioner had concealed that it was ex-parte and that its evidence stood closed, with an application in that regard pending. On instructions, counsel withdrew the petition unconditionally. The petition and accompanying applications were dismissed as withdrawn, with a clarification that the order shall not stand in the way of the pending application for setting aside ex-parte, which shall be decided on merits. No issue on merits was adjudicated.

¶1

$~80

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CM(M) 1985/2025, CM APPL. 64483/2025, 64487/2025, 64484/2025, 64486/2025 & 64485/2025

¶4

COTTAGE INDUSTRIES EXPOSITION LTD .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Anunaya Mehta, Mr. Inder Singh Adhikari, Mr. Vidhan Malik and Ms. Anandita Tayal, Advocates

¶6

versus

¶7

GOPAL DAS ESTATES AND HOUSING PVT LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ashok Chhabra, Mr. Bimlesh Shekhar and Mr. Kunal Jaggi, Advocates

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶9

O R D E R % 14.10.2025

¶10

Petitioner/defendant has assailed order dated 28.04.2025 of the learned trial court, whereby application filed by petitioner/defendant for permission to examine all defendant’s witnesses was dismissed. The application was dismissed largely on the ground that chief affidavits of witnesses other than DW1 ( already under cross-examination at that time ) had not been filed. However, the learned trial court permitted continuation of cross-examination of DW1.

¶11

After addressing partly, learned counsel for petitioner/defendant, on instructions of his client, seeks permission to withdraw this petition

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

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 15/10/2025 at 12:03:28

¶14

unconditionally as after elaborate discussion for about 30 minutes, it is disclosed by learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff that the petitioner/ defendant has concealed that it is ex-parte and defendant’s evidence was closed, regarding which application of the petitioner is pending.

¶15

In view of above circumstances, as requested, the petition and the accompanying applications are dismissed as withdrawn. However, at request of learned counsel for petitioner/defendant, it is made clear that the present order shall not stand in the way of application of petitioner/defendant for setting aside ex-parte and the same shall be decided on merits.

¶16

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

¶17

OCTOBER 14, 2025/as

¶18

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 15/10/2025 at 12:03:28

Cottage Industries Exposition Ltd. v. Gopal Das Estates and Housing Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cottage Industries Exposition Ltd. v. Gopal Das Estates and Housing Pvt. Ltd.

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

Manav Agarwal Vs Nemo

Sh Dinesh Singhal Alias Sindhal Vs Deepak Jain & Anr.

Amrik Singh Gill & Anr. Vs Janta Land Promoters Limited through Its Md/Director/Incharge/Manager

Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd. (Tcil) Vs M/S Shring Constructions Company Pvt. Ltd.

Kunal Shingla Vs Megha Shingla

Anil Verma Vs Anil Suneja & Ors.

Abhishek Mahajan Vs Shilpa Mahajan

Hanuman Beej Bhandar Vs Iffco-Mc Crop Science Private Limited

Sh Dinesh Singhal Alias Sindhal Vs Deepak Jain & Anr.

Amrik Singh Gill & Anr. Vs Janta Land Promoters Limited through Its Md/Director/Incharge/Manager

Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd. (Tcil) Vs M/S Shring Constructions Company Pvt. Ltd.

R.K Yadav Vs Nitin a Gokhale

Amita Sharma & Ors. Vs Anita Luthra & Ors.

Jai Nath Yadav & Anr. Vs Somnath Yadav @ Shobhnath Yadav