Back
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Ram Prakash Aneja – Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Lal Aneja (Deceased) Through Lrs – Respondent
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 tha
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.
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
