Dismissed

Satish Kumar Meena v. State Revenu Departmentors

Rajasthan HC6 Jan 2015CW/7874/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Granting one last opportunity to the petitioner to lead evidence in a civil suit previously dismissed on the ground of insufficient opportunities, conditional upon payment of court costs and appearance on a specified date.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted one last opportunity to lead evidence to appear on 4.2.2015, conditional upon payment of Rs. 1,000 costs.

Satish Kumar Meena Vs State Revenu… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

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

¶2

O R D E R

¶3

S. B. Ci vi l Wr i t Pet i t i on no. 7874/ 2014

¶4

Sat i sh Kumar Meena vs

¶5

St at e of Raj ast han and or s

¶6

Dat e of Or der : 06/ 01/ 2015

¶7

HON' BLE MR. JUSTI CE J. K. RANKA

¶8

Mr . VS Chauhan f or t he pet i t i oner Mr . Dhar mender a Par eek Dy GC

¶9

Counsel f or t he St at e has f i l ed an Appl i cat i on no. 56818/ 2014 u/ Ar t . 226( 3) of Const i t ut i on of I ndi a f or vacat i on of ad- i nt er i m expar t e st ay or der dat ed 16. 7. 2014.

¶10

Wi t h t he consent of bot h t he counsel s, t he mat t er i s f i nal l y hear d.

¶11

Thi s wr i t pet i t i on has been pr ef er r ed agai nst t he or der dat ed 27. 5. 2014 passed by t he Ci vi l Judge ( Sr . Di v. ) Mahwa, Dausa i n Ci vi l Sui t No. 20/ 2012 wher eby t he appl i cat i on u/ s 151

¶12

of CPC f i l ed by pl ai nt i f f - pet i t i oner f or r e- openi ng t he case f or pl ai nt i f f ' s evi dence has been di smi ssed as t he evi dence of pet i t i oner pl ai nt i f f was cl osed on 12. 3. 2014.

¶13

The cont ent i on of l ear ned counsel f or t he pet i t i oner i s t hat t r i al cour t has cl osed t he evi dence of t he pet i t i oner on t he pr emi se t hat

¶14

10 oppor t uni t i es wer e gr ant ed t o t he pet i t i oner and he coul d not l ead hi s evi dence.

¶15

Counsel f or t he pet i t i oner submi t s t hat on many occasi ons Pr esi di ng Of f i cer was not avai l abl e and even t he f i l e was t r ansf er r ed t o anot her Pr esi di ng Of f i cer and on some occasi ons t her e was st r i ke, t her ef or e he pr ays t hat one mor e l ast oppor t uni t y be gi ven t o t he pet i t i oner and on t hat day he woul d cer t ai nl y l ead t he evi dence.

¶16

Counsel f or t he St at e obj ect s t o t he pr ayer made by t he counsel f or t he pet i t i oner . He submi t s t hat t he pet i t i oner wi l l agai n mi suse t he l i ber t y whi ch i s appar ent on per usal of t he or der sheet s of t he l ower cour t whi ch have been f i l ed by t he pet i t i oner hi msel f i n t he wr i t pet i t i on. He al so pr ays t hat i f l ast oppor t uni t y i s gr ant ed t hen cost shoul d be i mposed upon t he pet i t i oner f or wast i ng t he t i me of t he cour t .

¶17

Af t er consi der i ng t he ar gument s advanced by counsel f or t he par t i es, i n my vi ew and i n t he i nt er est of j ust i ce, one l ast oppor t uni t y deser ves t o be gr ant ed t o t he pet i t i oner t o l ead hi s evi dence al one subj ect t o payment of cost of Rs. 1, 000/ - whi ch wi l l be pai d t o t he r espondent s.

¶18

Accor di ngl y, t he wr i t pet i t i on i s di sposed wi t h t he af or esai d obser vat i ons. The pet i t i oner

¶19

i s di r ect ed t o appear bef or e t he t r i al cour t on 4. 2. 2015 and l ed hi s evi dence and i n case he f ai l s t o l ead hi s evi dence on t he af or esai d dat e t hen t he t r i al cour t i s f r ee t o deci de t he mat t er on mer i t s on t he basi s of mat er i al avai l abl e on r ecor d.

¶20

Om 67 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. Om pr akash P. A.

Satish Kumar Meena v. State Revenu Departmentors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Kumar Meena v. State Revenu Departmentors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Benu Joshi Vs Gopal Singh Chauhan

Arjun Lal and Others Vs Surja Ram and Others

C T O Kota Vs M/S Chambel Fertilizers and Chem

Balu Ram Vs Smt Bholi Devi and Ors.

Smt Kamlesh Sachdeva Vs Rajender Prasad Gupta Anr.

Smt Geeta Devi Vs Sampat Badhara and Ors.