Pushpa Devi Vs Maninder Singh

By way of the present petition, the petitioner seeks recall of the order dated 22.04.2026 passed by the learned District Judge-01 (West), Tis Hazari Court, Delhi, in CIV DJ 498/2021, whereby petitioner’s right to crossexamine PW-1 was closed.

¶13

Broadly, the learned Trial Court, in the impugned order, observed that the main counsel for the petitioner was not present and that a request for adjournment had been made on his behalf. The learned Trial Court further

¶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 08/07/2026 at 11:41:57

¶16

noted that PW-1 had appeared on several occasions and had already been cross-examined on multiple dates. On the basis of the said observations, the learned Trial Court proceeded to close the petitioner’s right to further crossexamine PW-1.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been passed without due appreciation of the previous proceedings reflected in the judicial record as well as the circumstances brought to the notice of the learned Trial Court. He further submits that, on 22.04.2026, the learned Trial Court was informed that his daughter’s marriage was scheduled to be solemnised on 30.04.2026, and that he was, therefore, occupied with the arrangements and preparations relating thereto. It is further submitted that the marriage certificate evidencing the solemnisation of the marriage has been placed on record before this Court.

¶18

Having considered the submissions advanced and upon perusal of the record, this Court finds that the petitioner’s right to further cross-examine PW-1 was closed on account of the absence of the main counsel on the date fixed.

¶19

The impugned order also reflects that the PW-1 had already been cross-examined by the petitioner on several occasions and proceedings do not indicate any persistent or deliberate attempt on the part of the petitioner to delay the trial.

¶20

The explanation furnished for the absence of the main counsel, namely, his preoccupation with the marriage of his daughter, which has also been substantiated by the marriage certificate placed in on record, appears to be bona fide and does not disclose any element of wilful negligence or lack of diligence.

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

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 08/07/2026 at 11:41:57

¶23

In these circumstances, and in order to advance the cause of substantial justice, this Court is of the view that the impugned order deserves to be set aside to the limited extent of granting the petitioner one final and non-extendable opportunity to complete the cross-examination of PW-1.

¶24

It has also been brought to the notice of this Court that the matter is listed before the learned Trial Court on 08.07.2026.

¶25

In view of the aforesaid, the impugned order is set aside and the petition is allowed, granting the petitioner last and final opportunity to crossexamine PW-1 on 08.07.2026. Accordingly, PW-1 shall be made available for cross-examination on the said date. In the event PW-1 is unavailable on 08.07.2026, the learned Trial Court shall adjourn the matter to a date convenient to the Court and ensure the presence of PW-1 on the date so fixed for the purpose of cross-examination by the petitioner.

¶26

With the aforesaid directions, the present petition, along with pending applications, if any, stands disposed of.

¶27

Copy of this order be immediately sent to the learned Trial Court for compliance.

¶28

JULY 7, 2026 gs/dd

¶29

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

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 08/07/2026 at 11:41:57

Pushpa Devi v. Maninder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pushpa Devi v. Maninder Singh

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

M/S Denasa Buildcon and Ors. & Ors. Vs a. Mishra Proprietor of Metallon Building Systems

Harpal Singh Chawla & Ors. Vs M/S Unicon Info Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Galaxy Oncology Associates Pvt. Ltd. Vs 2S Wellness and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

V.K.Bahl and Anr. Vs Engineering and Industrial Corpn Ltd. and Ors.

Smt Shakti Bala & Ors. Vs Smt Anjali Sharma & Anr.

Hira Lal & Ors. Vs Jai Chand Bothra & Ors.

Kshitiz Prakash Vs Brij Bhushan Attri

Shri Balram Aggarwal Since Deceased through His Lrs Vs Shri Sunil Gupta

M/S Denasa Buildcon and Ors. & Ors. Vs a. Mishra Proprietor of Metallon Building Systems

Harpal Singh Chawla & Ors. Vs M/S Unicon Info Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Galaxy Oncology Associates Pvt. Ltd. Vs 2S Wellness and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Raj Tomar Vs M/S Jai Durga Traders Private Ltd.

Vatika Limited Vs Sunil Verma & Anr.

Tarun Kumar Jain Vs Meenakshi Jain and Anr.