Delhi High Court
Shri Chandan Aggarwal vs Shri Krishan Lal And Ors. on 2 February, 2023
Neutral Citation Number 2023/DHC/000864
$~43
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 02.02.2023
+ CM(M) 1748/2019 & CM APPL. 52713/2019
SHRI CHANDAN AGGARWAL ..... Petitioner
versus
SHRI KRISHAN LAL AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Pramod Kumar Ahuja and Mr. Ansul
Sharma, Advocates.
For the Respondents : Mr. J.C. Mahindro, Mr. Jasmeet Singh and
Mr. Shubham Aggarwal, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J. (ORAL)
[ The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode ]
1. Petitioner challenges the order dated 20.08.2019, whereby an
application under Section 151 of the CPC, 1908, whereby the request to
record the statements of Shri Dharamvir Khanduja and Shri Vijay
Kumar was refused.
2. Mr. Pramod Kumar Ahuja, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the affidavits in respect of the aforesaid witnesses were
already filed on record of the Trial Court, however, at the relevant time,
the witnesses had refused to get their statements recorded in favour of
the petitioner. It was only subsequently when the said witnesses agreed
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
16:55:22
Neutral Citation Number 2023/DHC/000864
to give their statements in favour of the petitioner that the said
application was filed before the learned Trial Court requesting such
examinations.
3. Mr. Mahindro, learned counsel for the respondents vehemently
opposes the said request.
4. Mr. Mahindro, learned counsel drew my attention to page No.
119, which is the part of the preliminary objections of the reply filed on
behalf of the respondents to the application under Section 151 of the
CPC, 1908, seeking summoning of the aforesaid two witnesses.
5. In particular, Mr. Mahindro drew the attention to para 2 of the
preliminary objections which contained the extracts of the orders passed
by the learned Trial Court during the pendency in respect of the
aforesaid witnesses.
6. A perusal of para 2, wherein the extracts of orders dated
21.04.2016, 21.07.2016, 17.09.2016 and 24.09.2016 passed by the
learned Trial Court, are extracted, makes it clear that the witnesses,
namely, Shri Dharamvir Khanduja and Shri Vijay Kumar were not
present on 21.04.2016 and the counsel himself had stated that the
witnesses are not interested in deposing and sought time to move an
application for summoning other witnesses. Subsequently, on the other
dates, no such request was ever made before the learned Trial Court.
7. After a passage of long time, it appears that the petitioner sought
to examine the said two witnesses and filed the application under
Section 151 of the CPC, 1908.
8. The aforesaid application ended up in the impugned order being
passed.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
16:55:22
Neutral Citation Number 2023/DHC/000864
9. I have perused the order passed by the learned Trial Court in
respect of the application under Section 151 of the CPC, 1908, regarding
examination of the two witnesses is concerned and find that the Trial
Court has given cogent reasons basis whereof, the said application was
dismissed.
10. The learned Trial Court has observed that more than 10 years had
passed and it was for the petitioner to have taken appropriate steps in
time at the relevant stage to call for the said witnesses in support of his
suit. Having failed to do that, learned Trial Court did not find any reason
to interfere therewith.
11. This Court has considered the aforesaid and is in agreement with
the conclusions reached by the learned Trial Court.
12. There is no merit in the present petition and the same is dismissed
with no order as to costs.
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J .
FEBRUARY 2, 2023/nd
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
16:55:22
