IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J.
Ram Prakash Aneja - Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Lal Aneja (Deceased) Through Lrs & Ors. - Respondents
CM(M) 1647 of 2023 & CM APPL. 52126 of 2023 (stay)
Decided On : 06-11-2023
Article 227 - Impugning Trial Court's Order - The court granted the petitioner the last opportunity to lead evidence, subject to certain conditions, and restricted the petitioner to a specific time and opportunities to complete the evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to challenge the Trial Court's order closing the evidence of the defendant, the petitioner herein.
Finding of the Court:
The court granted the petitioner the last opportunity to lead evidence subject to payment of costs and remaining present before the Trial Court on specified dates. The petitioner was also restricted to a specific time and opportunities to complete the evidence.
Issues: The issues revolved around the closure of the defendant's evidence by the Trial Court and the petitioner's request for the last opportunity to lead evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on granting the petitioner the last opportunity to lead evidence, subject to specific conditions, and restricting the petitioner to a specific time and opportunities to complete the evidence.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of with the court granting the petitioner the last opportunity to lead evidence subject to certain conditions and restrictions.
JUDGMENT
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J. (Oral)
1. This Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order dated 17.08.2023 passed by the ADJ-04, North West, Rohini Courts, Delhi (`Trial Court') in CS DJ 578326/2016, whereby the Trial Court closed the evidence of the defendant i.e., the Petitioner herein.
1.1. The Petitioner herein is the defendant no.1 and the Respondent No.1 is the plaintiff before the Trial Court.
2. The learned counsel for Respondent no. 1(ii) and Respondent no. 1(iii) is present. He states that Respondent no. 1(ii) and Respondent no. 2 are the same person.
2.1. He states that the said Respondents have no objection if last opportunity to lead evidence is granted to the Petitioner herein on the terms set out in the order dated 09.10.2023 passed in this petition.
2.2. He states that, however, the Petitioner herein has been served upon the list of witnesses dated 12.10.2023 which incorrectly reads as list of documents.
2.3. He further states that in this list of the Petitioner the documents sought by the Petitioner from Laxmi Commercial Bank are of the year 1983 which consequently is beyond the period of eight (8) years, and it is unlikely that the old record would be still available with the bank.
2.4. He states that in order to ensure that trial is not prolonged unnecessarily, the petitioner be restricted to the time and opportunities within which he must complete his evidence.
3. None appears on behalf of Respondent no. 1(i) and Respondent no. 3 despite service.
4. This Court has considered the submissions of the parties.
5. This order is being passed in continuation of the order dated 09.10.2023 passed earlier in this petition. The Petitioner shall remain bound by the statements recorded in order dated 09.10.2023.
5.1. The Petitioner is granted last opportunity to lead his evidence subject to payment of costs of Rs.20,000/-to the legal heirs of Respondent no. 1 and to Respondent no. 2 on or before 16.11.2023. The Petitioner shall remain duly present before the Trial Court on 16.11.2023 and on all subsequent dates until his examination and cross-examination is complete and discharged.
5.2. Further, the Petitioner will take appropriate steps before Trial Court for examination of the witnesses enlisted in the list of witnesses dated 12.10.2023, on 16.11.2023, and it is directed that not more than two (2) opportunities will be granted to the Petitioner to summon the witnesses enlisted. This direction is being passed in view of the submission of the Respondents qua the possible unavailability of the bank records.
6. It is made clear that if the defendant(s) fail to avail of the opportunity granted by this Court vide this order, the right of the Petitioner to lead evidence shall stand closed without any further clarification.
7. It is directed that the Respondent No. 4 shall remain bound by the statement recorded in the order dated 09.10.2023.
8. With the aforesaid directions and consent of the counsel for parties present in Court, the petition stands disposed of.
9. Pending application if any stands disposed of.
Granting the last opportunity to lead evidence and imposing specific conditions and restrictions on the petitioner.
The main legal point established is that the court has the discretion to set aside an order closing the right to lead evidence and grant further opportunity, considering the circumstances and subject....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited and circumscribed nature of the superintending jurisdiction vested in Article 227 of the Constitution of India, emphasizing the importa....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of granting reasonable opportunities to the defendant to lead evidence and the need for judicial orders to fix actual dates for r....
Repeated failures to comply with procedural orders may justify the closure of the right to lead evidence, but courts can grant final opportunities to ensure fairness.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.