Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Ashok Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Sushil Chander Sharma – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to prior court order (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. failed effort to admit late evidence (Para 4 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. dispute over property ownership and delay (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. determination on admitting additional documents (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. court's final directives and costs (Para 11 , 12) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through video conferencing.
2. The present petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 23rd October, 2019, passed by the ld. ADJ-12, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, by which the application under Order VIII Rule 1A of the CPC, was dismissed by the Trial Court. By the said application the Defendant in the suit/ Petitioner herein, sought to place on record certain documents.
3. The brief background is that a civil suit bearing Suit No. 514/2008 for possession and recovery of arrears of mesne profits and damages, was filed by Mrs. Shakuntala Devi - wife of Late Mr. Rajinder Pal Sharma against the Defendant - Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma. Mr. Rajinder Pal Sharma and Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma are brothers. The suit property is the first floor of the property bearing No. H-72, Shivaji Park, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi-
Litigants should not suffer due to their counsel’s mistakes, allowing late evidence in exceptional circumstances while stressing the need for expedition in justice.
A litigant ought not to suffer due to a mistake by the defendant's counsel, and the court may allow the placement of additional documents at a belated stage of the proceedings if it deems fit.
Matters of procedure should not hinder the dispensation of justice, and the relevance of documents for just and fair adjudication should be considered when deciding on applications to bring documents....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that evidence produced by the parties cannot be considered in the absence of pleading, and parties should not be permitted to travel beyond their p....
The court emphasized the importance of providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner/defendant to defend themselves and held that the refusal to take the documents on record by the Trial Court c....
The court affirmed that documents not disclosed with the written statement in commercial cases cannot be admitted, but contradictory decisions on evidence closure were ruled unsustainable.
Procedural delays should not impede justice; courts may allow document submissions if relevant for fair adjudication.
The court has the power under section 151 CPC to allow additional evidence to be brought on record, with caution and care, to meet the ends of justice, even if there is no specific provision in the C....
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
