Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
INDERJEET SINGH
SUKH SAGAR BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW/17342/2022
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE - SECTION 151 - REOPENING OF EVIDENCE - DELAY IN SUBMITTING EVIDENCE - SUFFICIENT CAUSE - DELAY CAUSED BY LITIGATION -
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and cancellation of order of sub division and mandatory injunction. The suit was initially decreed by the trial Court, but on appeal, the decree was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the trial Court. The petitioner-plaintiff filed an amended plaint and impleaded the respondent Nos.6 & 7 as defendants in the suit proceeding. During the pendency of the suit proceeding, the respondent Nos.6 & 7 filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. before the trial Court which was dismissed. Being aggrieved by the said order, the respondent Nos.6 & 7 filed S.B. Civil Revision Petition No.138/2021 before this court which was dismissed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.02.2022 and directed the trial Court to decide the suit within a period of nine months. The learned trial Court when the petitioner-plaintiff failed to submit its evidence, closed the right to submit the evidence vide order dated 12.10.2022. The petitioner-plaintiff thereafter filed an application under Section 151 C.P.C. for reopening of its evidence which was dismissed by the trial Court vide order dated 16.11.2022, hence this writ petition has been filed by the petitoner-plaintiff challenging the orders dated 12.10.2022 & 16.11.2022.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the writ petitions filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs and set aside the orders dated 16.11.2022 and 12.10.2022. The court held that the delay in submitting evidence was caused by the litigation filed by the respondent Nos.6 & 7 and that the petitioner-plaintiff should be given one last opportunity to submit their complete evidence before the trial Court on payment of cost.
Issues: Whether the petitioner-plaintiff should be granted one last opportunity to submit their complete evidence before the trial Court on payment of cost.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in submitting evidence was caused by the litigation filed by the respondent Nos.6 & 7 and that the petitioner-plaintiff should be given one last opportunity to submit their complete evidence before the trial Court on payment of cost.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petitions filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs and set aside the orders dated 16.11.2022 and 12.10.2022. The court held that the delay in submitting evidence was caused by the litigation filed by the respondent Nos.6 & 7 and that the petitioner-plaintiff should be given one last opportunity to submit their complete evidence before the trial Court on payment of cost.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17342/2022
Sukh Sagar Buildcon Private Limited, (Previously Known As
Sapphire Ceremic And Glass Private Limited) Office 201, Laxmi
Complex, M.i. Road, Jaipur Through Director Shri Surendra
Kumar Baradia S/o Late Shri Sagar Mal Baradia, Aged 63 Years,
R/o Plot No. 20, Baradia Colony, Museum Road, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Secretariat
Jaipur
2.
Deputy Secretary - Third, Urban Development
Department, Secretariat Jaipur
3.
Jaipur Nagar Nigam, Jaipur, Through Its Chief Executive
Officer, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur
4.
Commissioner (Planning) And Secretary, Bhawan Anugya
And Sankarm Samiti , Nagar Nigam-5, Office Lalkothi,
Tonk Road, Jaipur
5.
Senior Town Planner, Nagar Nigam Lalkothi, Tonk Road,
Jaipur
6.
Shriniwas Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramdayal Sharma, R/o
220, Navjeevn Upvan, Daddho Ka Bagh, Moti Doongari
Road, Jaipur
7.
Ambrish Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramdayal Sharma, R/o
220, Navjeevn Upvan, Daddho Ka Bagh, Moti Doongari
Road, Jaipur
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15482/2022
Sukh Sagar Buildcon Private Limited, (Previously Known As
Sapphire Ceremic And Glass Private Limited) Office 201, Laxmi
Complex, M.i. Road, Jaipur Through Director Shri Surendra
Kumar Baradia S/o Late Shri Sagar Mal Baradia, Aged 63 Years,
R/o Plot No. 20, Baradia Colony, Museum Road, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Secretariat
(2 of 5)
[CW-17342/2022]
Jaipur
2.
Deputy Secretary - Third, Urban Development
Department, Secretariat Jaipur
3.
Jaipur Nagar Nigam, Jaipur Through Its Chief Executive
Officer, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road, Jaipur
4.
Commissioner (Planning) And Secretary, Bhawan Anugya
And Sankarm Samiti , Nagar Nigam-5, Office Lalkothi,
Tonk Road, Jaipur
5.
Senior Town Planner, Nagar Nigam Lalkothi, Tonk Road,
Jaipur
6.
Shriniwas Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramdayal Sharma, R/o
220, Navjeevn Upvan, Daddho Ka Bagh, Moti Doongari
Road, Jaipur
7.
Ambrish Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramdayal Sharma, R/o
220, Navjeevn Upvan, Daddho Ka Bagh, Moti Doongari
Road, Jaipur
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)
:
Ms. Sukriti Kasliwal
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. G.P. Sharma
Mr. Mahesh Chand Gupta
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
Order
03/01/2023
These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner-plaintiff
challenging the order dated 12.10.2022 whereby the evidence of
the petitioner-plaintiff was closed by the trial Court as well as the
order dated 16.11.2022 whereby the application submitted by the
petitioner-plaintiff under Section 151 C.P.C. for reopening of
evidence was dismissed by the trial Court.
Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner-plaintiff filed a
suit for declaration and cancellation of order of sub division and
mandatory injunction. Initially the suit filed by the petitioner-
(3 of 5)
[CW-17342/2022]
plaintiff was decreed by the trial Court vide order dated
22.07.2014. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree,
the respondent Nos.6 & 7 filed Civil First Appeal No.459/2014
before this court which was allowed by the Coordinate Bench of
this court and matter was remanded back to the learned trial
Court vide order dated 21.01.2019 and the petitioner-plaintiff filed
amended plaint and impleaded the respondent Nos.6 & 7 as
defendants in the suit proceeding, thereafter during pendency of
the suit proceeding, the respondent Nos.6 & 7 filed application
under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C. before the trial Court which was
dismissed by the trial Court vide order dated 20.09.2021. Being
aggrieved by the said order, the respondent Nos.6 & 7 filed S.B.
Civil Revision Petition No.138/2021 before this court which was
dismissed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order datd
16.02.2022 and directed the trial Court to decide the suit within a
period of nine
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
