Back
M. S. SONAK
Vilasini A. Shirodkar – Appellant
Versus
Ritzwan Sheikh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Heard Ms Suzette Pereira for the petitioner and Mr Matlock D'Souza for the respondent.
2. Rule. With the consent of and at the request of the learned Counsel for the parties, the rule is made returnable forthwith.
3. The challenge in this petition is to the order dtd. 16/7/2018, by which the learned Trial Court dismissed the petitioner's application for adjournment and closed the petitioner's evidence.
4. The petitioner is the plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No.41/2014. The respondent is the defendant. The suit is for the restoration of possession of immovable property situated, according to Ms Pereira, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, near Dabolim Airport.
5. Ms Pereira points out that the matter was adjourned on earlier occasions due to the non-availability of the Judge. She pointed out that there was sufficient cause for the petitioner not proceeding with the evidence on 9/4/2018 and after considering this cause adjournment was granted up to 13/6/2018. She pointed out that the petitioner or rather the Power of Attorney of the petitioner, who is the son of the petitioner, is a seaman employed on international ships. She pointed out that he had to sail away in terms
The court balanced the interest of justice with the prejudice to the respondent and granted an additional opportunity to the petitioner subject to payment of substantial costs.
The right to lead evidence is a valuable vested right, and substantial justice should inform the approach of the court in granting opportunities to lead evidence.
The right to lead evidence in civil proceedings is fundamental and should only be forfeited for significant reasons, especially when delays are due to unavoidable circumstances.
The main legal point established is that the Trial Court should consider the reasons for adjournments and afford opportunities to parties to lead evidence, especially when the delay is not attributab....
The court reaffirmed the principle that parties must diligently prosecute their cases and that undue adjournments harm the justice system.
A party must demonstrate diligence in presenting evidence, but courts may grant additional opportunities to file evidence in the interest of justice, subject to conditions such as the payment of cost....
The court emphasized the importance of providing reasons in orders and balanced the interests of the parties by granting another opportunity to the petitioner, subject to payment of costs.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
