Allowed

Munna Qureshi v. Rais Qureshi

Rajasthan HC23 Oct 2019CW/3905/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court allowed a writ petition challenging a trial Court order that closed the petitioner-defendant's evidence. The High Court found it just and proper to grant one more opportunity for cross-examination and set aside the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the order dated 27.04.2013 and grant one more opportunity to the petitioner for cross-examination on payment of Rs. 2,000/-.

Munna Qureshi Vs Rais Qureshi — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3905/2014

¶3

Munna Qureshi Son of Ramjan, aged 42 years, by cast Musalman, resident of Dhobiyo ka Chowk, Mardan Khan Wali Gali, Moti Doongari Road, Jaipur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Rais Qureshi Son of Ggeesa Qureshi, aged 48 years, by caste Musalman, resident of House No.1236, Dhobiyo ka Mohalla, Gali Mardhan Khan, Moti Doongari Road, Jaipur.

¶7

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinay Mathur For Respondent(s) : Mr. P.L. Sharma

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH

¶9

Order

¶10

23/10/2019

¶11

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-defendant challenging the order dated 27.04.2013, passed by the trial Court whereby his evidence was closed.

¶12

Brief facts of the case are that the respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction against the petitioner-defendant before the trial Court in the year 2007. After completion of evidence of the respondent-plaintiff, the petitionerdefendant submitted his evidence on 29.11.2012, thereafter, the trial Court fixed the matter for cross examination of the defendant-petitioners on three dates i.e. 05.02.2013, 16.03.2013 and 27.04.2013 but defendant-petitioner failed to appear for his cross examination, therefore, his evidence was closed by the trial Court vide order dated 27.04.2013. Hence, the present writ

¶13

(2 of 3) [CW-3905/2014]

¶14

petition has been filed by the petitioner-defendant challenging the order dated 27.4.2013.

¶15

Counsel for the petitioner-defandant submitted that the trial Court has committed illegality in passing of the order dated 27.04.2013 as only three opportunities were granted to the petitioner-defendant for his cross examination and he appeared on previous dates but he was not cross-examined by counsel for the plaintiff-respondent.

¶16

Counsel further submits that although number of opportunities were given to the plaintiff-respondent to conclude his evidence but the trial court wrongly closed evidence of the petitioner-defendant.

¶17

Counsel for the respondent-plaintiff submitted that there is no illegality committed by the trial Court in passing of the order dated 27.04.2013.

¶18

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶19

This writ petition filed by the petitioner-defendant deserves to be allowed for the reason; firstly on the date fixed by the trial Court, the petitioner-defendant has submitted his affidavit and he was called for cross examination by the trial Court, however, on two dates fixed by the trial Court, the petitioner-defendant was present before the trial Court but he was not cross examined as either the time was sought by counsel for the plaintiff-respondent or the work before the trial Court was suspended by the lawyers and; secondly, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court deems it just and proper to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner-defendant to submit his evidence.

¶20

In that view of the matter, this writ petition is allowed. The order passed by the trial Court dated 27.04.2013 is set aside. One

¶21

(3 of 3)

¶22

[CW-3905/2014]

¶23

more opportunity is granted to the petitioner-defendant to submit his evidence before the trial Court on the next date of hearing on payment of cost of Rs.2,000/-. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below.

¶24

(INDERJEET SINGH),J

¶25

Pcg/130

Munna Qureshi v. Rais Qureshi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munna Qureshi v. Rais Qureshi

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

Rajeev Kasliwal Vs Smt Vimla Devi Kasliwal and Anr.

Dhanushree Meena (Minor) through Her Parents and Natural Guardian, D/O Shri Vinod Kumar Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Gonind Sahai Gupta S/O Late Sh. Narayan Sahai Vs Hari Babu @ Harish Kumar Saxsena S/O Sh. Kundan Lal Saxena

Surendra Kumar Tambi S/O Shri Gulabchand Tambi Vs Jairamdas Chhangani S/O Chhogamal

Mahaveer Singh@Mahaveer Rana S/O Shri Parshuram Singh B/C Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Gopal Lal Pareek S/O Shri Kanhaiyalal Vs Kanhaiyalal S/O Late Shri Govind Baksh @ Bhori Lal