Chattisgarh High Court
Dr. Saurabh Kumar Sahu vs Dr. Ankita Sahu on 30 June, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:29064
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WP227 No. 909 of 2024
1 - Dr. Saurabh Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Shyam Lal Sahu Aged About 39
Digitally
REKHA signed by
SINGH REKHA
SINGH
Years R/o Sr. Mig - 66, Housing Board Colony, Hatkeshwar Ward,
Dhamtari (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - Dr. Ankita Sahu W/o Dr. Saurabh Kumar Sahu Aged About 35 Years
R/o D-4, Anupam Nagar, Behind Tv Tower, Raipur (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Sahu, Advocate
For respondent : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Judgment On Board
30/06/2025
1) By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated
24.09.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court,
Raipur (C.G.), whereby the right of the petitioner to lead evidence
has been closed.
2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the right of the
petitioner to lead evidence has been closed by the learned
Principle Judge, Family Court, Raipur vide order dated 24.09.2024
on the ground that on ten consecutive dates, the petitioner has
sought adjournment. He further submits that the observation
made by the learned Court is contrary to the record. He referred to
the order-sheets dated 14.03.2023, 09.05.2023, 22.07.2023,
18.08.2023, 11.10.2023, 24.11.2023, 30.11.2023, 06.01.2024,
23.01.2024, 27.04.2024, 22.06.2024, 23.07.2024 and 22.08.2024
and submitted that on most of the dates, the respondent/wife took
adjournment. He further argues that on three dates, proceedings
were adjourned on account of condolence. He further contends
that on the last two dates 23.07.2024 and 21.08.2024, both
parties took adjournment. He prays that the petitioner has a good
case on merits and in the interest of justice, he may be afforded
one more opportunity to lead evidence.
3) On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes.
4) Heard.
5) The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the matter of Deepak Vs.
Ramesh Sethi, 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 381 has held as under:-
"13. The right to lead evidence is pivotal to
a fair trial and partakes of the character of
natural justice and fair play. No doubt,
where a party is unconscionably indolent,
the Court may put its foot down and close
the right of the party to lead evidence; else,
as adversarial litigations are meant to be
tried after allowing the parties to an
adequate opportunity to place their
respective stands on record, the Court
should not be hyper-technical, in the matter
of granting opportunity to lead evidence
and the like."
It is trite law that the Court should not be hyper-technical in the
matter of granting opportunity to lead evidence, therefore, in the
opinion of this Court, the learned Trial Court ought to have
afforded one more opportunity to the petitioner to lead evidence.
6) Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, the order
passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur
(C.G.) dated 24.09.2024 is hereby quashed. Learned Family
Court shall grant one opportunity to the petitioner to lead evidence
subject to payment of a cost of Rs. 2,000/- payable to the
respondent on the next date of hearing.
7) However, if the petitioner fails to lead evidence on the date given
by the learned Family Court, the said Court would be at liberty to
close the right of the petitioner to lead evidence.
8) Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands allowed.
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
JUDGE
Rekha
