Dr Donalds Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Infer India — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Dr Donalds Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Infer India — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

One effective opportunity granted to the petitioner/defendant to cross-examine PW1 Mr. S.K. Lumb before the learned Trial Court, which may record the cross-examination through videoconferencing per prevalent Rules/Guidelines; petitioner burdened with cost of Rs. 15,000/- payable to the opposite party on or before the next date fixed by the Trial Court; petition and pending applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner/defendant should be granted one opportunity to cross-examine PW1 Mr. S.K. Lumb in the suit pending before the learned Trial Court.

Court's answer

Taking into account the overall facts and the concession of respondent's counsel, the petition is allowed with a direction that the learned Trial Court shall permit cross-examination of PW1 Mr. S.K. Lumb, giving the defendant one effective opportunity.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner/defendant is burdened with a cost of Rs. 15,000/-, payable to the opposite party on or before the next date fixed by the learned Trial Court.

Key takeaways

The learned Trial Court is permitted to have the cross-examination recorded through videoconferencing in terms of the prevalent Rules/Guidelines.ratio¶15
The date and time of the cross-examination shall be fixed by the learned Trial Court subject to its board position and after ascertaining the convenience of learned counsel for the parties and of the witness.ratio¶16
The present petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms, and all pending applications are also disposed of.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Manoj Jain, J.) allowed CM(M) 226/2024 preferred by the defendant, whose sole prayer was one opportunity to cross-examine PW1 Mr. S.K. Lumb. Counsel for the respondent/plaintiff, while maintaining that the impugned order suffered no illegality or perversity, graciously conceded, without prejudice, to one last and final opportunity being granted, noting the witness is settled in Canada and requesting recording via videoconferencing. The Court allowed the petition directing the learned Trial Court to permit the cross-examination, affording the defendant one effective opportunity; permitted recording of the cross-examination through videoconferencing in terms of the prevalent Rules/Guidelines; left fixation of date and time to the Trial Court subject to board position and convenience of counsel and the witness; and burdened the petitioner with a cost of Rs. 15,000/- payable to the opposite party on or before the next date fixed. The petition and all pending applications stand disposed of.

$~24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of Decision: 02^nd May, 2025

- CM(M) 226/2024 & CM APPL. 7030/2024 & CM APPL. 17700/2024 DR DONALDS PROMOTERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.

Through: Mr. Anirudh Bakhru, Mr. Ayush Puri, Ms. Archita Mahlawat, Mr. Mohd. Umar, Mr. Kanav Manmani and Ms. Vijay Laxmi Rathi, Advocates

versus

INFER INDIA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vivek Kishore, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

The prayer in the present petition is merely limited to the effect that one opportunity to cross-examine PW1 Mr. S.K. Lumb be granted to petitioner/defendant.

Learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff submits that though, there is no merit or substance in the present petition and the impugned order also does not suffer from any illegality or perversity, in order to ensure that there is no further delay in his suit, he would have no objection if, without prejudice to his rights and contentions, one last and final opportunity is granted to the defendant to cross-examine PW1 Mr. S.K. Lumb. He submits that let there be one effective opportunity only in this regard. He also submits that said witness is presently settled in Canada and that learned Trial Court may be requested to record his cross-examination using videoconferencing tools .

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:0 3.05.2025 15:05:29

CM(M) 226/2024 1

Learned counsel for petitioner/defendant submits that his request is merely confined to one opportunity to cross-examine PW1 Mr. S.K. Lumb and since he has already led his evidence, he is not, even otherwise, seeking to lead any further evidence in affirmative.

Keeping in mind the overall facts of the case and the gracious concession given by learned counsel for respondent, present petition is allowed with direction that the learned Trial Court shall permit such cross-examination of PW1 Mr. S.K. Lumb, by giving defendant one effective opportunity in this regard.

Simultaneously, petitioner/defendant is burdened with cost of Rs. 15,000/- which shall be payable to the opposite party on or before the next date fixed by learned Trial Court.

Learned Trial Court would be permitted to get the cross-examination recorded through videoconferencing in terms of the prevalent Rules/Guidelines.

Date and time of such cross-examination shall be fixed by the learned Trial Court subject to its board position and after ascertaining the convenience of learned counsel for the parties as well as that of the said witness.

Present petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

All the pending applications are also disposed of.

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

MAY 2, 2025/ dr/shs

CM(M) 226/2024 2

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:0 3.05.2025 15:05:29