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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6502

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


$~60 *


Date of Decision: 27th April, 2026


+ CM(M) 941/2026


ALKA RANI .....Petitioner


Through: Mr. Chandra Shekher Yadav and Mr. Ambuj Johar, Advocates.


versus


NARESH KUMAR .....Respondent


Through: Mr. Pankaj Tomar, Mr. Vishal Kumar and Mr. Naveen Kishore Advocates.

Ms. Vaishali Gupta, Panel Counsel for GNCTD (Civil) with Ms. Rashi Aggarwal, Advocates for R-2.


CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA

ORDER (Oral)

Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J.

1. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode.

CM APPL. 27760/2026 (for exemption)

2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.

CM(M) 941/2026& CM APPL. 27759/2026 (for stay)

3. The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the impugned order dated 18th March, 2026, passed by the learned Trial Court in CS No. 934/2020, whereby the application filed by the petitioner/defendant under Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking setting aside of orders, whereby their right to cross-examine PW-1 Sh. Naresh Kumar was closed, has been dismissed.

Signature Not Verified Signed By:MANISHA RAJPUT
Signing Date:28.04.2026 11:19:14

4. Learned Counsel for the respondent appears on advance notice and accepts notice.

5. Heard. Record perused.

6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that PW-1 is the material witness of the case and petitioner has not been given sufficient opportunities to cross-examine him. It is further argued that grave prejudice would be caused to the petitioner if the opportunity is not granted to them to cross-examine PW-1.

7. Per Contra, learned Counsel for the respondent has argued that sufficient opportunities have already been granted by the learned Trial Court to the petitioner to cross-examine PW-1. The present petition has been filed only to delay the Trial Court proceedings and deserved to be dismissed.

8. A perusal of the record shows that several opportunities have already been granted to the petitioner to cross-examine PW-1. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it would be in the interest of justice, if one more opportunity is granted to the petitioner to cross-examine PW-1, as the respondent can be compensated with costs.

9. Accordingly, one more opportunity is granted to the petitioner to cross-examine PW-1, subject to payment of costs of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the respondent which is in addition to the costs already imposed upon her by the learned Trial Court.

10. It shall be open to the learned Trial Court to allow cross-examination of PW-1 on the date already fixed or on any other date as may be convenient to the learned Trial Court.

11. The present petition is disposed of in the above said terms. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

Signature Not Verified Signed By:MANISHA RAJPUT
Signing Date:28.04.2026 11:19:14

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 Back to top