Delhi High Court
Indra Gupta vs Delhi Development Authority And ... on 13 March, 2018
$~13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on :- 13th March, 2018
+ CM(M) 78/2018 & CM No.2182/2018
INDRA GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Mahajan with
Mr. Dhruv Mohan & Ms. Rakhi
Sharma, Advocates.
versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS
....Respondents
Through: Ms. Arti Bansal, Advocate for-
R-1.
Ms. Gaganpreet Chawla, Adv.
for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
ORDER (ORAL)
1. The background facts against which the present petition has
come up before this Court were noted in the order dated 19.01.2018
which to the extent relevant here, reads thus:-
"The civil suit (CS 328/14 - new no.7460/2016) was
instituted by the petitioner in the year 2001. The issues
were framed on 12.05.2006. Undoubtedly, the petitioner
has dragged feet and has not led evidence in spite of
various opportunities being given. Though the request
for adjournment on some of the dates may be justified,
the need having arisen because of the illness of the
petitioner herself or that of her counsel, there is no
escaping the impression that the petitioner has not been
very diligent or vigilant in prosecuting the case. It is
against this backdrop that by order dated 25.05.2017, the
Civil Judge closed the opportunity for evidence and later
by order dated 22.11.2017 the application for recall of
the said order was also declined.
At the hearing the learned counsel for the
petitioner submitted that he undertakes, on instructions,
from the petitioner that she would appear as her own
witness without making any request for adjournment on a
date that may be given for the purpose, her affidavit
having already been submitted, it only requiring to be
tendered and thereafter the petitioner offering herself for
cross-examination. He submitted that at the same time
the petitioner would take steps to have summons issued
to the Sub-Registrar for production and proof of certain
documents duly registered (General Power of Attorney
and Will), the only other witness to be examined. He
also submitted that the petitioner is ready to bear the
costs for the delay which has occurred.
The first respondent / DDA has appeared through
counsel on advance notice.
Issue notice to the other parties through counsel
returnable for 13.03.2018.
The trial court, in the meanwhile, shall not pass
any final order.
Dasti."
2. All the respondents have been served but only first and second
respondents have appeared there being no appearance on behalf of
others. It is stated that other respondents/defendants are not contesting
the suit.
3. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides and having gone
through the record, this Court is of the opinion that in view of the
undertaking submitted and recorded on 19.01.2018, one last
opportunity be granted to the petitioner to lead evidence restricted to
what was mentioned in the said proceedings dated 19.01.2018 quoted
above, though subject to certain conditions, which are added as
under:-
(i) The plaintiff (petitioner) shall pay Rs.25,000/- each as costs to
the first and second respondents on the next date of hearing.
(ii) The trial court will fix an appropriate date suitable to its
calendar for giving opportunity to the plaintiff to lead and
conclude evidence.
(iii) Steps shall be taken by the plaintiff in advance for service of the
witness from the office of sub-Registrar who only needs to be
examined other than the plaintiff herself.
(iv) It shall be the obligation of the plaintiff to remain present on the
first call of the case with her counsel duly briefed and instructed
ready to proceed with the matter.
(v) In case of any further default, the opportunity hereby renewed
shall be treated as having been exhausted.
4. The petition and the pending application stand disposed of in
above terms.
5. Dasti under the signatures of Court Master.
R.K.GAUBA, J
MARCH 13, 2018
srb
