Back
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Pawan Saraswat – Appellant
Versus
Munish Gupta – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J. (Oral) - This petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India impugns the order dated 22.03.2023 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (`Trial Court') in civil suit no. 3298/2017, titled as `Munish Gupta v. Pawan Sarawat and Ors.', whereby the Respondent's application dated 14.02.2022, filed under Order XVIII Rule 17 read with Section 114 and 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (`CPC') and Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, for recall the order dated 15.12.2021 was allowed.
1.1. The Trial Court vide order dated 15.12.2021 closed the Respondent i.e., plaintiff's right to lead evidence.
1.2. The Petitioner herein is the defendant no.1, the Respondent No. 1 is the plaintiff and Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are defendant nos. 2 to 4 respectively, in the civil suit. The suit has been filed seeking permanent, mandatory injunction and damages with respect to first floor of property no. 1933 (Old No. 29/50 & 29/51), Aargraa fountain, Delhi-06 (`suit property').
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Trial Court failed to deal with the preliminary objection raised by the defendant n
The court has the discretion to allow the recall of an order but can impose appropriate directions to ensure compliance and prevent further delay.
The need for the Trial Court to decide the application of the Petitioner on its own merits and the imposition of legal costs as a condition for the liberty granted.
The main legal point established is the court's discretion to grant a final opportunity to lead evidence in a civil suit, emphasizing the importance of conducting proceedings diligently and cooperati....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the provisions of Order XVIII Rule 3 of the CPC and the determination of what qualifies as rebuttal evidence in a civil suit.
Delay in filing written statement can be condoned subject to compensatory costs, and disputes should be decided on merits rather than technicalities.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of substantial justice over technical considerations and highlights the need to consider the circumstances and record of the case before concluding on a party's....
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
