Back
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
Sh. Om Prakash – Appellant
Versus
Sant Singh Bal (Now Deceased) Through Lrs. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Tushar Rao Gedela, J. (Oral)
[The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode]
CM APPL. 22917/2023 & CM APPL. 23047/2023
1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
2. The applications stand disposed of.
CM(M) 729/2023 & CM APPL. 22916/2023
CM(M) 731/2023 & CM APPL. 23047/2023
3. The petitioners challenge the order dated 27.09.2022 as also 04.03.2023 passed in CS SCJ 84031/2016 titled Sant Singh Bal vs. Om Prakash and in CS SCJ 84032/2016 titled Sant Singh Bal vs. Jagdish Chander, whereby as per the impugned order dated 27.09.2022, learned Trial Court had closed the right of the petitioners to record the defendant's evidence and in terms of order dated 04.03.2023, an application under Order XVIII Rule 17 of CPC, 1908 filed by the petitioners/defendants, was dismissed.
4. Mr. Pranut Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners draws attention of this Court to para 5 of the impugned order dated 04.03.2023 to submit that the entire basis upon which the right of the petitioners to record his evidence was closed, was on the basis that the learned Trial Court had assumed that the cross-examination of PW-3 was not being concluded by the petitioners/defendants. Learne
The disputes between the parties should be disposed of on merits rather than on petty technical issues.
The exceptional circumstances of the Covid-19 pandemic and the medical condition of the parties should be considered in granting opportunities to lead evidence.
The suspension of the bar of limitation by the Supreme Court due to the COVID-19 pandemic influenced the court's decision to set aside the order closing the right to lead evidence.
Parties to litigation should be afforded full opportunity to lead evidence and should not be deprived of such valuable rights on mere technicalities.
Granting leniency to litigants during the pandemic period and allowing one opportunity to lead evidence.
The genuine difficulty faced by a party's counsel may justify granting additional opportunities in legal proceedings.
The court emphasized the importance of judicial discretion and procedural law in achieving the ends of justice, highlighting that the closure of evidence should be a last resort and adequate opportun....
The court upheld the necessity for timely evidence submission while allowing one last opportunity for the petitioner, emphasizing procedural diligence.
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
