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

1982 Supreme(Raj) 136

DWARKA PRASAD
Gulab Singh – Appellant
Versus
Dhanraj – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M.L. Kala, for Petitioner; S.R. Singhvi, for Respondents.

DWARKA PRASAD, J.—A sum of Rs. 30/— was awarded as costs to the defendant opposite party on February 10, 1982 as the plaintiff petitioner did not file the list of his witnesses nor his witnesses were present in the court while the case was fixed for recording his evidence on that date. On the next date fixed in the case i.e. February 22, 1982 the plaintiff prayed for further time to produce his evidence and to make payment of costs. The time was allowed with consent of the learned counsel for the defendant. Similarly, time was again allowed to the plaintiff for producing his evidence and for payment of costs on April 24, 1982. The case was then fixed for July 29, 1982 and on this date the plaintiff again asked for an adjournment, but the defendant objected to it on the ground that the earlier costs had not been paid. The plaintiff was prepared to make part payment of the sum of Rs. 20/— but the learned counsel for the defendant was not prepared to accept incomplete payment of the amount of costs. In these circumstances, the trial court closed the evidence of the plaintiff.

2. In this revision petition the learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner submits that the plaintiff does n

























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