Disposed¶20

Aditya Poddar & Anr. v. Pawan Sharma & Ors.

Delhi HC2 Apr 2025CM(M)/602/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court; CM(M) 602/2025; Manoj Jain; disposed as not pressed; admission of documents after arguments concluded and judgment reserved; Surviving Member Certificate; Electricity Bill; Trial Court order dated 28.02.2025; evidence permitted for both plaintiff and defendant beyond application scope; rights and contentions reserved; direction for expeditious disposal and recording of evidence; next Trial Court date 08.08.2025.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petition disposed of as not pressed with all rights and contentions of the parties reserved, and a direction to the learned Trial Court to ensure expeditious disposal and record the evidence without any further delay. ¶20

Aditya Poddar & Anr. Vs Pawan Sharma & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~40

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CM(M) 602/2025, CM APPL. 19016/2025 & CM APPL. 19017/2025 ADITYA PODDAR & ANR. .....Petitioner

¶4

Through: Mr. Hari Kishan, Advocate. versus

¶5

PAWAN SHARMA & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Anand Prakash, SC with Ms. Varhsa Arya, Advocates.

¶6

Mr. Sushil Raaja SPC-UOI for Delhi Police.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 02.04.2025 1. Petitioner is defending suit for possession, permanent and mandatory injunction and is aggrieved by order dated 28.02.2025 whereby learned Trial Court has permitted the plaintiffs to place on record two documents.

¶11

According to learned counsel for petitioner, these documents are not relevant to decide the controversy in question and such request was rather entertained when the case was at the verge of pronouncement. It is submitted that after hearing final arguments, the court had reserved the matter for judgment and the date on which the judgment was to be pronounced, the plaintiff moved the abovesaid application seeking permission to place on record the two documents i.e. Surviving Member Certificate and one Electricity Bill .

¶12

It is submitted that learned Trial Court should not have allowed any such application more so, when the arguments had already been heard and the case had been reserved for judgment.

¶13

The concern of the petitioners herein is also to the effect that the request was, merely, to the place on the record documents but the learned

¶14

CM(M) 602/2025 1

¶15

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 04/04/2025 at 13:53:17

¶16

Trial Court has gone beyond the relief sought in the application and has also permitted not only the plaintiff but also defendant to lead evidence with respect to the above said documents.

¶17

The next date before the learned Trial Court is stated to be 08.08.2025.

¶18

Learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 appear on advance notice.

¶19

After hearing arguments for some time, learned counsel for petitioner, without prejudice to his rights and contentions, does not press the present petition. He, however, submits that since the matter has already delayed considerably, the learned Trial Court may be requested to ensure that the evidence is recorded without any further delay and no further indulgence of such kind is given to the plaintiffs, in future.

¶20

Keeping in mind the overall facts and circumstances of the case and as submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner today, the present petition is disposed of as not pressed.

¶21

All the rights and the contentions of the parties are reserved.

¶22

However, learned Trial Court shall ensure expeditious disposal and the evidence be recorded, without any further delay.

¶23

MANOJ JAIN, J

¶24

APRIL 2, 2025 /sw/shs

¶25

CM(M) 602/2025 2

¶26

Aditya Poddar & Anr. v. Pawan Sharma & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aditya Poddar & Anr. v. Pawan Sharma & Ors.

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

Trishna & Anr. Vs Seema & Anr.

Rajesh Sharma Vs Akhil Sharma & Ors.

Shahnaz Hussain Vs Suresh Dhanuka

Seema Rani Vs Umesh Kumar Trehan

Kirti Vs Anuj Kumar Goyal Alias Punit

M/S Tdi Infrastructure Limited Vs Ms Prachi Mathur

Rajni Bhambri Vs Vishal Mehra

Farooq Alam Baig Vs Vania Mirza @ Priya Kumari

Trishna & Anr. Vs Seema & Anr.

Rajesh Sharma Vs Akhil Sharma & Ors.

Shahnaz Hussain Vs Suresh Dhanuka

Mrs Shashi Sharma & Ors. Vs Mr Gaurav Sharma & Ors.

Niharika Ghosh @ Niharika Kundu Vs Shankar Ghosh & Anr.

M S Golf International Vs M/S Karshivnik International Pvt. Ltd.