Soni Gupta Vs Gaurav Garg — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Soni Gupta Vs Gaurav Garg — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty granted to the petitioner-wife to make an appropriate request afresh before the learned Judge, Family Court if she cannot conclude the cross-examination within the three dates already fixed; the decision on any such request rests entirely with the learned Trial Court in accordance with law. No additional dates were granted in advance by this court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner-wife should be granted two additional dates (beyond the three granted by the learned Trial Court) to conclude her cross-examination of the husband in the pending divorce proceeding.

Court's answer

Cross-examination is not to be done in perpetuity and must be concluded in a reasonable, time-bound manner; however, there is no strait-jacket formula fixing the time-frame for concluding such cross-examination.

Ratio / Principle

Without expressing any opinion on rival contentions, the court disposed of the petition, granting liberty to the petitioner-wife to make an appropriate request afresh before the learned Judge, Family Court, in case she is not able to conclude her cross-examination within the said three dates.

Key takeaways

Whether to entertain any such fresh request is entirely up to the learned Trial Court, which will take an appropriate decision in accordance with law.ratio¶¶22
The order must not be construed as the court having, in advance, granted any such indulgence to the petitioner/wife.ratio¶¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

HIGH COURT OF DELHI (Manoj Jain, J.) (oral), 05.05.2025 — CM(M) 820/2025 with CM APPL. 26881-26882/2025. Soni Gupta (wife), defending a divorce petition filed by her husband Gaurav Garg, sought two further dates to complete her cross-examination of the husband, submitting that the exhaustive, document-reliant examination-in-chief could not be answered within the three dates granted by the Trial Court (cross-examination then slated for 06.05.2025 and 15.05.2025, the third date to be fixed by the Local Commissioner). Observing that cross-examination must conclude within a reasonable time-frame though no strait-jacket formula governs its duration, and expressly refraining from expressing any opinion on rival contentions, the court disposed of the petition and pending applications, granting the wife mere liberty to renew her request before the Judge, Family Court, with the decision left entirely to the Trial Court in accordance with law; the order confers no advance indulgence on the petitioner.

$~58

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of Decision: 05^th May, 2025

- CM(M) 820/2025 & CM APPL. 26881-26882/2025

SONI GUPTA .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. S.S. Panwar, Ms. Nivedita, Mr. Ravi Panwar, Advs.

versus

GAURAV GARG .....Respondent

Through: Mr. Prabhat Kumar, Adv. with respondent in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

Petitioner is defending a petition seeking divorce filed by her husband.

The grievance in the present petition is very limited.

The cross-examination of her husband is underway and according to learned counsel for the wife, in view of the fact that the examination-in-chief is very exhaustive and reliance has been placed upon several documents, the counsel for the wife is not in a position to conclude cross-examination within the three dates granted by the learned Trial Court. The request is, therefore, to grant two more dates for concluding cross-examination.

The cross examination is now scheduled on 06.05.2025, 15.05.2025 and the third date is yet to be fixed by the learned Local Commissioner.

Needless to say, the cross-examination is not to be done in perpetuity and it has to be concluded in a reasonable time bound-manner. However, at

CM(M) 820/2025 1

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:0 6.05.2025 14:46:14

the same time, there can't be any strait jacket formula, deciding about the time-frame for concluding such cross-examination.

Learned counsel for respondent/ husband is also present on advance notice.

After hearing arguments from both the parties and without expressing any opinion with respect to rival contentions, the present petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner wife to make appropriate request before the learned Judge, Family Court afresh, in case she is not able to conclude her cross-examination within the above said three dates. It will be entirely up to the learned Trial Court to consider any such request and to take appropriate decision in accordance with law.

Needless to say, this order may not be construed as if this court has, in advance, granted any such indulgence to the petitioner/wife

Petition along with Pending applications stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

MAY 5, 2025/neha/shs

Signature Not Verified

CM(M) 820/2025 2

Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:0 6.05.2025 14:46:14