Disposed¶30

Vinay Aggarwal v. Har Bai (Deseased) through Lrs

Delhi HC9 May 2025CM(M)/478/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CM(M) 478/2025; Delhi High Court; Manoj Jain J.; 09.05.2025; closure of right to lead evidence restored; solitary defence witness; one effective opportunity; affidavit three days in advance; cost Rs. 20,000/-; old 1994 suit for possession and rendition of accounts; LR of deceased defendant; trial court liberty on recording testimony.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to enter the witness box as solitary witness for the defendant, subject to filing his affidavit at least three days in advance of the fixed date, availing only one effective opportunity, and paying Rs. 20,000/- cost to the plaintiff; pending application also disposed of. ¶30

Vinay Aggarwal Vs Har Bai (Deseased) through Lrs — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, as an LR of the deceased defendant, may be permitted to lead his evidence in the suit notwithstanding the impugned order dated 03.03.2025 closing his right to lead evidence.

¶13

Court's answer

Taking into account the overall facts and the gracious concession of plaintiff's counsel, the petition is disposed of with the following specific directions rather than being simply allowed or dismissed.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

Mr. Vinay Aggarwal is permitted to enter the witness box as solitary witness for the defendant.

¶22

Key takeaways

The petitioner shall file his affidavit before the learned Trial Court on the fixed date, with copy to the opposite side, at least three days in advance.ratio¶23
The petitioner is entitled to only one effective opportunity to lead this evidence.ratio¶24
Scheduling of the witness's examination is left to the learned Trial Court depending on its board position, and DW-Vinay Aggarwal must make himself available for examination and cross-examination without further delay.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Manoj Jain, J.), CM(M) 478/2025 with CM APPL. 14728/2025, decided 09.05.2025: In a suit filed in 1994 for possession and rendition of accounts, an order dated 03.03.2025 of the learned Trial Court had declined the petitioner (defending the suit as LR of deceased defendant Har Bai) further cross-examination of the plaintiff's witnesses and had also closed his right to lead evidence in affirmative. Confining his relief to the right to lead evidence, and noting that no witness had yet been examined from the defendant's side and that plaintiff's counsel graciously raised no objection albeit with cost, the Court disposed of the petition with directions: (i) Mr. Vinay Aggarwal permitted to enter the witness box as solitary witness for the defendant; (ii) affidavit to be filed on the fixed date (28.05.2025) with copy to the opposite side at least three days in advance; (iii) only one effective opportunity; (iv) scheduling of testimony left to the learned Trial Court, the petitioner to remain available for examination and cross-examination without delay; (v) petitioner burdened with cost of Rs. 20,000/- payable to the plaintiff. Pending application likewise disposed of.

¶1

$~45

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 09^th May, 2025

¶4

- CM(M) 478/2025 & CM APPL. 14728/2025 VINAY AGGARWAL

¶5

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nikhil Verma, Mr. Kapil Sharma and Ms. Mahak Agarwal, Advocates.

¶6

Versus

¶7

HAR BAI (DESEASED) THROUGH LRS

¶8

.....Respondent Through: Appearance not given.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

¶11

J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶12

Petitioner herein is defending a suit for possession and rendition of accounts and is aggrieved by order dated 03.03.2025 whereby his right to further cross-examine the witnesses of the plaintiff has been declined and by virtue of same order, his right to lead his evidence in affirmative has also been closed.

¶13

When the matter was taken up on 11.03.2025 by this Court, the learned counsel for petitioner submitted that he was confining his relief only to his right to lead evidence.

¶14

It is submitted that no witness has been examined from the side of the defendant and, as per the instructions, the petitioner herein i.e. Mr. Vinay Aggarwal, who is now one of the LR of the deceased defendant, would be entering into witness box.

¶15

The next date before the learned Trial Court is 28.05.2025.

¶16

The learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff submits that there is no

¶17

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 478/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 0.05.2025 16:52:57

¶18

merit or substance in the petition in question. However, in order to avoid any further unnecessary delay in their own suit, he states that he would have no objection if the abovesaid limited request is acceded to, albeit, with some cost.

¶19

The suit in question is indeed a very old one.

¶20

It was filed in the year 1994.

¶21

Keeping in mind the overall facts of the case and the gracious concession given by the learned counsel for the plaintiff, the petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶22

i) The petitioner herein i.e. Mr. Vinay Aggarwal is permitted to enter into witness box as solitary witness for the defendant.

¶23

ii) He shall file his affidavit before the learned Trial Court on the abovesaid fixed date with copy to the opposite side, at least three days in advance.

¶24

iii) The petitioner herein would be entitled to only one effective opportunity in this regard.

¶25

iv) Learned Trial Court, depending on its board position, would be at liberty to record the testimony of such witness on said date. It will be entirely upto the learned Trial Court to give another date for the purposes of recording of evidence of said witness and on any such date to be given by the learned Trial Court, the petitioner herein i.e. DW-Vinay Aggarwal would ensure that he makes himself available so that his examination and cross-examination is done, without any further delay.

¶26