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

DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Shally – Appellant
Versus
Ram Mohan Gautam – Respondent


Table of Content
1. dismissing an application under cpc (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. justifying need for additional witnesses (Para 5 , 6)
3. procedural requirements for witness lists (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
4. grounds for summoning witnesses (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
5. setting aside the impugned order (Para 17 , 18)
6. final order allowing petition (Para 19 , 20)

JUDGMENT(Oral)

1. An application by the petitioner, as the defendant in CS 203/18 (Ram Mohan Gautam v. Shally), preferred under Order XVI Rule 1(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) stands dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge ("the learned ADJ" hereinafter) vide the impugned order dated 20th July 2022.

2. Consequent to completion of pleadings and framing of issues, the respondent, as the plaintiff in the suit, chose only to lead his sole evidence as PW-1.

3. No list of defence witnesses was filed by the petitioner, as the defendant in the suit. Nonetheless, the learned ADJ allowed the recording of evidence of the petitioner as DW-1.

4. After recording of evidence of DW-1 was complete, the petitioner moved the application, under Order XVI Rule 1(3) of the CPC, which stands disallowed by the impugned order

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top