Disposed¶20

Archana Mirgan & Anr. v. Bimla Devi (Since Deceased) through Lrs. and Anr.

Delhi HC27 Jan 2025CM(M)/3927/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CM(M) 3927/2024, Delhi High Court, Ravinder Dudeja J, order dated 27.01.2025; Article 227 petition; review application under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC dismissed 09.10.2024 by DJ-04 Saket in DJ No. 7227/2016; closure of plaintiff evidence under Order 17 CPC by order dated 23.08.2022; suit for partition and injunction; one final opportunity to lead plaintiff evidence; previous cost and additional cost Rs.10,000/-; no further opportunity; liberty to summon official witness; petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

One opportunity to lead the plaintiff's evidence, subject to payment of previous cost, if any, and additional cost of Rs.10,000/-; liberty to summon the official witness; no further opportunity to lead plaintiff's evidence. ¶20

Archana Mirgan & Anr. Vs Bimla Devi (Since Deceased)… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 09.10.2024 of the District Judge-04, Saket dismissing the review application under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC (along with condonation of delay) ought to be set aside in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

Though the court found no merit in the challenge to the impugned order, it considered it appropriate that the lis between the parties be decided on merits, and accordingly granted the petitioner one more opportunity to lead the plaintiff's evidence.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

The petition is disposed of with the direction that the petitioner be granted one opportunity to lead the plaintiff's evidence, subject to payment of previous cost, if any, and an additional cost of Rs.10,000/-, payable to the respondent on the date fixed before the trial court.

¶20

Key takeaways

The petitioner is at liberty to summon the official witness, but shall not get any further opportunity to lead the plaintiff's evidence and must ensure both witnesses are present on the next date fixed before the trial court.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to set aside the order dated 09.10.2024 of the District Judge-04, Saket, Delhi (in Civil Suit DJ No. 7227/2016) dismissing the application under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC for review of the order dated 23.08.2022, by which the trial court had closed the plaintiff's right to lead evidence under Order 17 CPC owing to pendency of plaintiff evidence since 2018 and non-payment of previous cost. Holding that there was no merit in the challenge but that the lis should be decided on merits, the High Court disposed of the petition, granting the petitioner one final opportunity to lead the plaintiff's evidence subject to payment of previous cost, if any, and additional cost of Rs.10,000/-, with liberty to summon the official witness and an express direction that no further opportunity would be afforded and both witnesses must be present on the next date.

¶1

$~74

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CM(M) 3927/2024 & CM APPL. 69300/2024 STAY

¶4

ARCHANA MIRGAN & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Vimram Saini, Advocate.

¶5

versus

¶6

BIMLA DEVI (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LRS. AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms.Beenashaw N. Soni, Standing Counsel MCD with Ms. Mansi Jain, Advocate for R-4

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 27.01.2025

¶10

This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to set aside the impugned order dated 09.10.2024 passed by the learned District Judge-04, Saket, Delhi in Civil Suit being DJ No. 7227/2016 whereby the application under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC for review of the order dated 23.08.2022 along with the condonation of delay, has been dismissed.

¶11

Petitioner is the plaintiff before the trial court. He filed a suit for partition and injunction.

¶12

The learned Trial Court taking note of the fact that case was pending for the evidence of the plaintiff since 2018, and previous cost was not paid, proceeded under Order 17 CPC and closed the right of the plaintiff to lead plaintiff evidence.

¶13

Petitioner thereafter filed an application for review of the order along

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 30/01/2025 at 12:39:56

¶16

with an application for condonation of delay, but the same was also dismissed by order dated 09.10.2024.

¶17

After part submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he needs only one opportunity to lead the entire evidence of the plaintiff.

¶18

Learned counsel for respondent submits that he has no objection, in case the petitioner is granted liberty to lead the plaintiff’s evidence subject to heavy cost, as also upon payment of the previous cost.

¶19

Even though, there is no merit to the challenge to the impugned order, it would be appropriate if the lis between the parties is decided on merits and therefore, for the said purpose, petitioner is granted one more opportunity to lead the plaintiff’s evidence.

¶20

Petition is disposed of with the direction that petitioner be granted one opportunity to lead plaintiff’s evidence subject to payment of previous cost, if any, and additional cost of Rs.10,000/-. The learned counsel for petitioner undertakes to make payment of cost to the respondent on date fixed before the trial court

¶21

The petitioner is at liberty to summon official witness for the date fixed before the trial court. It is made clear that petitioner shall not get any further opportunity to lead plaintiff’s evidence, and therefore, must ensure that both the witnesses are present in court on the next date fixed before the trial court.

¶22

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

¶23

JANUARY 27, 2025/ib/r

¶24

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 30/01/2025 at 12:39:56

Archana Mirgan & Anr. v. Bimla Devi (Since Deceased) through Lrs. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Archana Mirgan & Anr. v. Bimla Devi (Since Deceased) through Lrs. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar Vs Sitara & Ors.

Titagarh Logistics Infrastructure (P) Ltd. Vs Managing Director Audi India a Division of Volkswagen Group Sales India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

New Delhi Municipal Council Vs Ajit Singh

Ms Redecon India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs Ms Vyom Ganga Engineers and Consultants Pvt. Ltd.

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Aditya Gupta Deceased through Lrs

Vishakha Sinjani Vs Amrit Kumar

Bhudevi Gautam Vs Jyoti Gautam and Anr.

Shri Anil Soni Vs Smt Nidhi Soni

Ashok Kumar Vs Sitara & Ors.

Titagarh Logistics Infrastructure (P) Ltd. Vs Managing Director Audi India a Division of Volkswagen Group Sales India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Ms Redecon India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs Ms Vyom Ganga Engineers and Consultants Pvt. Ltd.

Gaurav Khanna Vs Shiva Khanna

Mohit Kumar Vs Nirmala Sharma & Anr.

Ritu Pahwa Vs Payal Kashyap & Anr.