Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Vimla Menon (Dr.) – Appellant
Versus
Gopinath Menon – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. interrogatories application and responses (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. further applications and petitioner's responses (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. court's observations on evidentiary documents (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. ordering personal appearance of petitioners (Para 12) |
| 6. petitioners' arguments against oral examination (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 7. court's justification for oral examination (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 8. clarification on the exercise of discretion (Para 21 , 22) |
| 9. limits of jurisdiction under article 227 (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 10. final decision and dismissal of petition (Para 26) |
1. The petitioner, as the defendant before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge ("the learned Pr DSJ") in CS 204/2019, is aggrieved by order dated 15th March, 2022, passed by the learned Pr DSJ on applications filed by the respondent (the plaintiff before the learned Pr DSJ) under Order X and Order XI Rule 21, of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("the CPC").
2. The petitioners are the sisters of the respondent. Their brother, Ravi Menon, died interstate on 29th October, 2015. A partition suit (CS (OS) 6/2016) was instituted
The court affirmed its discretion under Order X of the CPC to order oral examination of parties for clarity in responses to interrogatories concerning defamation claims, rather than using more severe....
A party may summon additional witnesses even after issues have been framed, provided they demonstrate plausible reasons for their omission in the initial list, as required by the procedural guideline....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the purpose of providing the procedure of discovery by interrogatories in the CPC is to shorten the litigation, enable a party to obtain an ad....
The purpose of Order XI Rules 1 and 2 CPC is not aimed at filling up the lacuna at a belated stage.
The power to strike out pleadings under Order VI Rule 16 of the CPC should be exercised sparingly and with extreme care, caution, and circumspection.
Conducting cross examination in a suit is a specialized job. It is only with experience that a counsel develops skills for cross examination. Different Advocates may conduct cross-examination in diff....
Litigants are bound by the conduct of their advocates, and CPC provisions cannot be used to remedy previous evidential deficiencies.
Summoning a defendant as the plaintiff's witness is discouraged and should occur only in exceptional circumstances; the plaintiff must bear the burden of proof.
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
