Allowed

M/S Rajesh Investments v. M/S Anil Trading Comp

Rajasthan HC20 Jan 2015CW/763/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition and directed the trial court to grant one last opportunity to the defendant-petitioner to lead further evidence by himself and allow cross-examination on record documents, imposing costs on him.

What did the court decide?

Defendant-petitioner permitted to lead further evidence by self and be cross-examined on documents on record upon payment of Rs. 7,500 as costs.

M/S Rajesh Investments Vs M/S Anil Trading… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

I N THE HI GH COURT OF JUDI CATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAI PUR BENCH, JAI PUR

¶3

O R D E R

¶4

S. B. Ci vi l Wr i t Pet i t i on no. 763/ 2015

¶5

M/ s Raj esh I nvest ment s, Shyam Chamber , Ki r ana Bazar Akol a vs M/ s Ani l Tr adi ng Company Dat e of Or der : 20/ 01/ 2015 HON' BLE MR. JUSTI CE J. K. RANKA

¶6

Mr . Anoop Dhand f or t he pet i t i oner

¶7

I nst ant pet i t i on has been f i l ed agai nst t he or der dat ed 11. 4. 2014 passed by t he Addl . Di st r i ct & Sessi ons Judge No. 3, Al war by whi ch t he evi dence of t he pet i t i oner def endant was cl osed by t he t r i al cour t as 10 oppor t uni t i es wer e gr ant ed t o hi m and despi t e 10 oppor t uni t i es havi ng been gr ant ed, t he evi dence was not l ed on behal f of t he pet i t i oner - def endant .

¶8

Fol l owi ng pr ayer has been made i n t hi s wr i t

¶9

pet i t i on whi ch r eads as under :

¶10

“ Hence pr ayed t hat t he wr i t pet i t i on of t he pl ai nt i f f pet i t i oner may ki ndl y be accept ed and t he i mpugned or der dat ed 11. 4. 2014 ( Annexur e 8) and i mpugned or der dat ed 10. 12. 2014 ( Annx. 11) i n sui t no. 145/ 2011 ( t i t l ed as M/ s Ani l Tr adi ng Company v/ s M/ s Raj esh I nvest ment s) passed by t he l ear ned Addi t i onal Di st r i ct and Sessi ons Judge No. 3 Al war may ki ndl y be quashed and set asi de and t he appl i cat i on ( Annexur e 9) submi t t ed by t he pet i t i oner may ki ndl y be al l owed and t he t r i al cour t may ki ndl y di r ect ed t o r ecor d t he evi dence of t he pet i t i oner and hi s

¶11

¶12

wi t nesses and f ur t her pl eased t o di r ect t he t r i al cour t t o pr oceed wi t h t he mat t er i n accor dance wi t h l aw. ”

¶13

Counsel f or t he pet i t i oner cont ends t hat on account of deat h of mot her of t he pet i t i oner and pr i or t o t hat on account of her i l l heal t h, t he def endant - pet i t i oner was unabl e t o come and t o be exami ned. He cont ends t hat af f i davi t i s al r eady on r ecor d and al l t he document s ar e al r eady exhi bi t ed and onl y one l ast oppor t uni t y be gr ant ed i n vi ew of pr i nci pl es of nat ur al j ust i ce. He cont ended t hat genui ne cause has been shown on behal f of t he pet i t i oner f or gi vi ng hi m l ast oppor t uni t y t o l ead evi dence.

¶14

I have consi der ed t he ar gument s advanced by counsel f or t he pet i t i oner .

¶15

I t i s cer t ai nl y t r ue t hat t he t r i al cour t gr ant ed 10 oppor t uni t i es t o t he def endant pet i t i oner t o l ead evi dence and nor mal l y t hi s cour t i s of t he vi ew t hat i n such cases t her e shoul d be no l axi t y and t hat t act i cs of del ay shoul d be avoi ded. However , i t i s pl eaded by counsel f or t he pet i t i oner t hat mot her of t he pet i t i oner di ed and pr i or t o t hat she was unwel l . Looki ng t o t he pecul i ar f act s st at ed i n t he pet i t i on, i n my vi ew, one l ast chance deser ves t o be gr ant ed t o t he def endant - pet i t i oner f or exami nat i on of t he def endant

¶16

¶17

pet i t i oner al one on t he mat er i al avai l abl e on r ecor d and no ot her evi dence woul d be t aken except t he pet i t i oner - def endant .

¶18

Def endant - pet i t i oner i s per mi t t ed t o l ead f ur t her evi dence i n t hi s r egar d and accor di ngl y t r i al cour t i s di r ect ed t o cr oss exami ne def endant - pet i t i oner on a si ngl e day on t he document s and af f i davi t al r eady o r ecor d subj ect t o payment of cost of Rs. 7, 500/ - t o be pai d t o t he r espondent on or bef or e t he next dat e and t her eaf t er evi dence be cl osed.

¶19

Accor di ngl y, def endant - pet i t i oner i s di r ect ed t o appear bef or e t he t r i al cour t on 4. 2. 2015, or on t he next dat e f i xed by t he t r i al cour t on whi ch dat e, t he def endant - pet i t i oner woul d be cr oss exami ned by t he t r i al cour t on t he document al r eady avai l abl e on r ecor d.

¶20

I f t he pet i t i oner f ai l s t o appear on 4. 2. 2015 or on t he next dat e f i xed or avoi d cr oss exami nat i on of hi msel f , t he t r i al cour t i s f r ee t o pr oceed and deci de t he mat t er on mat er i al avai l abl e on r ecor d.

¶21

Wi t h t he above di r ect i on, t he wr i t pet i t i on i s di sposed of .

¶22

( J. K. RANKA) J.

¶23

Om 19 Al l cor r ect i ons made i n t he j udgment / or der have been i ncor por at ed i n t he j udgment / or der bei ng e- mai l ed.

¶24

¶25

Om pr akash P. A.

M/S Rajesh Investments v. M/S Anil Trading Comp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Rajesh Investments v. M/S Anil Trading Comp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Nidhi Vs Manish

Shri Rustam Vs Smt Radha Hemnani and Anr.

Sh Shanti Lal Prajapat Vs Sh Suresh Kumar Prajapat Ors.

Smt Anita Vs Padam Kumar Jaliya

Ratan Devi Vs Kailash Bhinda andORS

Man Singh and Another Vs Kailash and Others