SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Rakesh Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Saraswati Devi - Respondent
CM(M) 810 of 2022 & CM Appl. 35668 of 2022
Decided On : 29-08-2022




Default in prosecuting legal matters justifies closure of cross-examination rights; adjournments must be justified to ensure speedy court proceedings.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 227 - Default in prosecuting the matter - The court upheld the closure of the defendant's right to cross-examine the plaintiff, requiring her physical support due to age. - The Supreme Court in State of U.P. v. Shambhu Nath Singh emphasized that a witness should not be repeatedly called without a valid reason. - The defendant's numerous adjournment requests indicated a lack of seriousness in pursuing the case. (Paras 1, 6, 10)

Facts of the case:
The matter concerns a civil suit where the defendant failed to cross-examine the plaintiff despite multiple opportunities over a series of hearings, leading to the closure of the right to cross-examine.

Findings of Court:
The court found that there was a woeful lack of seriousness on the part of the petitioner in prosecuting the case due to default occurring on nine different dates.

Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted another opportunity to cross-examine a senior citizen plaintiff, given the defaults on multiple occasions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that consistent adjournment requests without valid reasons reflect poorly on the prosecuting party, justifying the trial court's closure of opportunities.

Result: Petition dismissed in limine.

Table of Content
1. default in prosecuting matter challenged. (Para 1 , 2)
2. record of adjournments reflects delays in cross-examination. (Para 3 , 4)
3. witness treatment and speedy trial emphasized. (Para 5 , 6)
4. failure of counsel cannot excuse default. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
5. court dismisses petition without interference. (Para 10 , 11)

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. This is yet another case in which the default in properly prosecuting the matter during trial is being sought to be undone by recourse to Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. The order dated 18th May 2022, passed in CS 9757/2016 (Saraswati Devi v. Rakesh Kumar) impugned in the present petition, closes the right of the petitioner, as the defendant in the suit, to cross-examine the respondent (the plaintiff in the suit), who happens to be a lady, 75 years of age, who requires physical support to come to the Court.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has very fairly placed on record the entire order sheets of the Court below, as per the directions of this Court on the last date of hearing. A perusal thereof reveals that affidavit by way of evidence was tendered by the respondent as PW-1 on 20th July 2017 and cross-examination of PW-1 was deferred on the said date. Thereafter, adjournments have been sought by the petitioner, to cross-examine respondent as PW-1 on 20th September 2017, 11th December 2017, 16th January 2018, 22nd May 2019, 6th February 2020, 19th March 2021, 22nd March 2022 and 18th May 2022, apart from 6th July 2018 and 18th September 2018 when the matter was adjourned at joint request.

4. The order sheets of the aforesaid dates of hearing read thus:

    Order dated 20th September 2017

    "CS No. 9757/16

    20.09.2017

    Present: Plaintiff with Ld. Counsel YP Singh, Ld. Counsel for the Plaintiff

    Defendant with Ld. Counsel Sh. Narender Singh (proxy counsel)

    Defendant seeks adjournment as main counsel has went to school of child in urgent meeting called as to safety of student.

    Heard. Not opposed.

    In the interest of justice an adjournment is granted for purpose fixed for 11.12.17 for RPE.

SCJ/East

20.09.17"

    Order dated 11th December 2017

"CS No. 9757/16

Saraswati Devi vs Rakesh Kumar

    11.12.2017

    Present: Plaintiff/PW-1 with counsel Ms. Vibha Walia. Defendant with proxy counsel Sh. Abhishek Vajpayi.

    Proxy counsel for defendant seeks adjournment citing unavailability of the main counsel Sh. Pratyush Chirantan as he is stated to have gone to Vashno Devi. Same is opposed by counsel for plaintiff.

    In the interest of justice, last and final opportunity is granted to the defendant to cross examine the plaintiff/PW-1. It is being clarified that no further opportunity shall be granted to the defendant to cross examine the plaintiff/PW-1.

    Put up for PE/cross examination of PW-1 on 16.01.2018.

(Harleen Singh)

SCJ/RC (East)/11.12.2017"

    Order dated 16th January 2018

"CS No. 9757/16

Saraswati Devi vs Rakesh Kumar

    16.01.2018

    Present: Plaintiff/PW-1 with counsel Ms Vibha Walia. Defendant in person.

    Defendant submits that he wishes to seek legal aid.

    Defendant is referred to the office of DLSA, East for the needful.

    Put up for PE/cross examination of plaintiff/PW-1 by way of last and final opportunity on 23.03.2018.

(Harleen Singh)

SCJ/RC (East)/16.01.2018"

    Order dated 6th July 2018

"CS No.9757/16

Saraswati Devi Rakesh Kumar

    06.07.2018

    Present: Plaintiff/PW-1 with proxy counsel Sh. Y P Singh Ahluwalia.

    Defendant with counsel Sh. Pratyush Chirantan.

    At joint request, put up for PE/cross examination of plaintiff/PW-1 for 18.09.2018.

(Harleen Singh)

SCJ/RC (East)/06.07.2018"

    Order dated 18th September 2018

"Civ Suit No. 9757/16

Saraswati Devi Vs. Rakesh Kumar

    18.09.2018

    Present: Sh. Dinesh Kumar, son of plaintiff. None for defendant.

    Son of plaintiff seeks passover for appearance of the plaintiff and her counsel.

    At request, matter is passed over for 12.30 p.m.

(Harleen Singh)

SCJ

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top