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

2022 Supreme(MP) 179

VIRENDER SINGH
Shyamnath Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Kripal Singh Bedi – Respondent


Advocates:
R.K. Verma with Ashish Datta for petitioner; Ashish Shroti for respondents No. 1, 2 and 13; Shiddharth Sharma for respondent No. 12.

ORDER

1. The grievance of the petitioner/plaintiff is that the trial Court has closed his right to produce evidence vide order dated 26.9.2018 (Annexure P/8).

2. The facts reflect that the petitioner filed a suit in the year 2006 seeking injunction against the respondents from interfering in his possession over the suit property. He concluded his evidence in the year 2011 but thereafter started filing interim applications at certain intervals. He filed 3-4 applications for taking additional documents on record. The last of them was considered and dismissed by the trial Court vide order dated 19.9.2018 which is under challenge in M.P. No.4705/2018. After the dismissal of that application, some more opportunities were granted to the petitioner to adduce evidence with a cogent warning that since the case pertains to the year 2006 and there are directions of the High Court to conclude such cases at the earliest, no further adjournment shall be granted. The trial Court repeatedly granted the last opportunity to adduce evidence with the aforesaid warning but the petitioner never bothered or honoured them. Ultimately, the trial Court refused to grant more opportunities and closed his right

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