The right to cross-examine witnesses is fundamental to a fair trial, and documents declared null and void can still be subject to cross-examination until the appeal regarding their validity is resolved.

1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 05.06.2018 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-03, South District, Saket Court Complex, New Delhi (in short “Trial Court”) in CS no.8413/16, titled as “Som Nath Setia vs. Ravi Setia & Ors.” whereby the learned Trial Court partly allowed the application moved by the respondent no.1 herein under Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (in short “CPC”) seeking the present suit to be adjourned sine die and to restrain the petitioners from cross-examining the respondent no.1 herein on the basis of the documents being declared null and void.

2. Petitioners herein are the defendants and the respondent no.1 herein is the plaintiff in CS no.8413/16 which is pending adjudication before the learned Trial Court.

3. To put it succinctly, the relevant facts are that petitioner no.2 had filed a suit titled as “Surinder Kumar vs. Som Nath & Ors,” bearing no. 25/1996 before the Civil Judge (Junior Division) & Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pilli Banga, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan against respondent no.1 and petitioner no.1 seeking a decree of declaration to the effect that parties be declared owners of property no. A-13, Geetanjali Enclave, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “suit property”), under a family settlement dated 05.11.1993 whereby the said property fell to the respective shares in terms of the family settlement. Additionally, the petitioner no.1 also prayed for a decree of partition in respect of one half share in the suit property. The above suit was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 12.12.1996 passed by the learned Civil Judge, strictly in terms of family settlement dated 05.11.1993 between the parties. 4. Thereafter, the respondent no. 1 filed a suit bearing CS no.257/2001 titled as “Som Nath Setia vs. Ravi Setia & Ors.” before the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi against the petitioners and Delhi Development Authority for declaration, cancellation of documents and permanent injunction, to declare the General Power of Attorney dated 23.07.1993 (in short “GPA”) said to be executed by respondent no.1 in favour of Sh. Madan Lal as null and void; a decree of declaration to the effect that Family Settlement dated 05.11.1993 between the petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 was null and void and to cancel the same; to pass a decree of declaration against the petitioners declaring that the Decree dated 12.12.1996 passed in suit no.25/1996 by the Court of Civil Judge, Hanuman Garh, Rajasthan as invalid, null and void and consequential relief of injunction to restrain petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 from acting upon the GPA dated 23.07.1993, Family Settlement dated 05.11.1993 and decree dated 12.12.1996; a decree of permanent injunction against respondent no.3 from acting on the aforesaid documents. 5. Vide judgment dated 24.07.2017, the learned Senior Civil Judge decreed the said suit and declared null and void, the GPA dated 23.07.1993, the Family Settlement dated 05.11.1993 and the judgment and decree dated 12.12.1996, passed in CS no.25/1996, by the learned Civil Judge, Rajasthan. Subsequently, the petitioners preferred an appeal against the said judgment & decree, which is pending adjudication before the Court of learned Additional District Judge, South District, Saket.

6. In the meanwhile, the respondent no.1 filed the present suit bearing CS (OS) no.2242/2010, before this Court against the petitioners for declaration and permanent injunction, thereby declaring Agreement to Sell dated 09.10.2009, General Power of Attorney dated 09.10.2009, Special Power of Attorney dated 09.10.2009 and Will dated 09.10.2009 executed by petitioners herein as vendors in favour of respondent nos. 2 and 3 in respect of the suit property as null and void and non-est. On enhancement of pecuniary jurisdiction of District Courts, the said suit was transferred to the learned Trial Court and renumbered as CS no.8413/16. On 05.05.2014, t