IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Ajay Passi - Appellant
Versus
Priyanka Passi - Respondent
CM(M) 1146 of 2022
Decided On : 23-11-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to family court order (Para 1) |
| 2. procedural agreements for evidence submission (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. timely filing for evidence and court's request (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. petition disposed with directions (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 46088/2022 (for condonation of delay)
This is an application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking condonation of delay of about 61 days in filing the petition.
For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed. The delay in filing the present petition is condoned.
CM(M) 1146/2022 & CM APPL. 46087/2022 (stay)
1. Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 25.05.2022, whereby though the ex-parte order dated 22.03.2022 against the petitioner was set aside but the learned Judge, Family Court declined to vary or modify the order of closure of RE.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his affidavit is ready and he may be given only one week's time to file the same and be available for the purpose of evidence.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent has very gracefully submitted that for the purpose of final adjudication of the disputes on merits, the petitioner may be given one opportunity to tender the affidavit and be available for the purpose of cross-examination. Learned counsel for the respondent further submits that he shall cross-examine the petitioner on the same day.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that he shall not seek any adjournment for the purpose of respondent evidence. Learned counsel further submits that his affidavit of evidence is ready to be filed immediately before the learned Trial Court. Learned counsel for the respondent further submits that he shall not lead any other evidence for the petitioner except the petitioner himself. Learned counsel for the petitioner also undertakes that he shall pay a cost of Rs.10,000/-, as imposed upon him on 17.01.2022, on 02.12.2022.
5. In view of the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, let the affidavit be filed on or before 28.11.2022.
6. Learned Trial Court is requested to take up the matter on 02.12.2022 for the purpose of evidence of the petitioner.
7. Learned Trial Court after recording the evidence of the petitioner shall dispose of the matter in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.
8. With these observations, the present petition along with the pending applications stands disposed of.
The court condoned a 61-day delay in filing an application and allowed the petitioner to present evidence to facilitate an expeditious resolution of the case.
A party must demonstrate diligence in presenting evidence, but courts may grant additional opportunities to file evidence in the interest of justice, subject to conditions such as the payment of cost....
A party must adhere to procedural timelines, and repeated failures to comply without sufficient justification may result in the dismissal of their petitions and applications.
The court emphasized that the closure of evidence should not be unduly harsh, especially when the delay was not intentional.
The main legal point established is that repeated failure to avail opportunities to file evidence and lack of justification for delay may demonstrate an intent to delay the suit, leading to dismissal....
Compliance with court orders is essential for a party's participation in trial proceedings; non-compliance can result in dismissal of claims and review applications.
The court holds that a delay in filing an appeal may only be condoned if sufficient cause is shown, emphasizing the necessity of bona fide reasons.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.