Delhi High Court
Mamta Goel @ Mamta Rani Goel vs Dhanraj Mittal (Deceased) Thr Lrs ... on 8 December, 2022
Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005467
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 08.12.2022
+ CM(M) 1596/2018
MAMTA GOEL @ MAMTA RANI GOEL ..... Petitioner
versus
DHANRAJ MITTAL (DECEASED) THR LRS & ORS.
..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Om Prakash, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. Vijay Sharma, Advocate with Ms. Megha
and Ms. Nancy, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J. (ORAL)
1. At the first call in the pre lunch session, proxy counsel had appeared
for the counsel for the respondents and sought pass over on the ground
that the learned counsel was on his legs in another Court.
2. On the second call at 02:55 PM, there is no appearance on behalf of
the respondents either.
3. The respondents are, thus, proceeded ex parte.
4. Petitioner challenges the order dated 27.08.2018 passed by the
learned Trial Court on an application under Order 11 Rule 1, 14 and 16
r/w Section 151 of the CPC, 1908 seeking disclosure/ discovery of the
documents.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
12:43:04
Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005467
5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it is the
case of the petitioner that the defendant No.5 is running his business in the
subject suit property without the consent of the plaintiff and to that extent
the petitioner sought indulgence of the Court under Order 11 seeking
interrogatory as to on what basis is defendant No.5 in possession and on
the basis of which documentary evidence, the defendant No.5 was
enjoying the suit property.
6. Learned counsel also submits that for the purposes of the issues
relevant to the trial, the said interrogatory/ discovery of facts or production
of documents is essential.
7. There is no representation on behalf of the respondents and they
have already been proceeded ex parte.
8. This Court has considered the impugned order and finds that there
is no reasoning given by the learned Trial Court to come to the conclusion
that the discovery or the interrogatories are not required or that they are
not essential for the purposes of the suit. All that the learned Trial Court
observes is that the discovery of documents is not necessary on the basis
that the defendant No.5, the respondent herein, will have to prove his case
by leading cogent and reliable evidence.
9. No reasons for agreeing or disagreeing with the contents of the
application or the arguments of the counsel have been indicated at all,
thereby prejudicing the rights of the petitioner in the trial.
10. For the reasons stated above, the impugned order is set aside to the
extent that it dismisses the application under Order 11 Rule 1, 14 and 16
r/w Section 151 of the CPC, 1908.
11. The application is restored and the learned Trial Court is directed to
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
12:43:04
Neutral Citation Number 2022/DHC/005467
re-hear and re-consider the matter on its own merits, after giving
opportunity of hearing to both the parties and pass a reasoned order.
12. Learned Trial Court is requested to take up the application under
Order 11 Rule 1, 14 and 16 r/w Section 151 CPC, 1908 filed by the
petitioner, on the date fixed before it i.e., 11.01.2023.
13. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with no order as to
costs.
14. At this stage, Mr. Vijay Sharma, learned counsel for the
respondents appears and has been apprised of the aforesaid order.
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J
DECEMBER 08, 2022/nd
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
12:43:04
