Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Ace Tel Linkers Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Som Prakash Yadav – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenging orders of the adj (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. history of adjournments and costs (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. failure to lead evidence and application for recall (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. court's jurisdiction under article 227 (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. directives for leading evidence (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. disposal of petition with no costs (Para 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT
C. Hari Shankar, J. (Oral)
1. This petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assails orders dated 11th July 2018 and 25th July 2018 passed by the learned Additional District Judge ("the learned ADJ") in CS 8107/2016 (Ace Tel Linkers Pvt. Ltd. v. Som Prakash Yadav).
2. The issue in controversy is short.
3. The order dated 11th July 2018 closes the right of the petitioner, as the plaintiff in the suit, to lead his evidence, and the order dated 25th July 2018 rejects the application filed by the petitioner, after passing of the order dated 11th July 2018, seeking one more opportunity to lead evidence.
4. Consequent to framing of the issues on 17th July 2017, CS 8107/2016 was listed on 2nd November 2017 for leading the evidence of the petitioner. The petitioner sought an adjournment, which was granted subject
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.
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....
Court affirmed limited intervention under Article 227 when no jurisdictional errors occur, reinforcing the necessity for litigants to actively pursue their cases.
The court has the discretion to allow the petitioner to lead further evidence despite delays in the proceedings.
The court permitted the petitioner to lead evidence despite procedural delays, underscoring that adjournments should not obstruct the pursuit of justice.
If either of respondent’s witnesses is absent on said date, right to lead evidence of said witnesses shall stand closed.
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
