Yashvir Singh vs Ryan International School & Anr. & Ors
2026 Latest Caselaw 1947 Del

Delhi High Court

Yashvir Singh vs Ryan International School & Anr. & Ors on 2 April, 2026

Author: Sachin Datta

Bench: Sachin Datta

                          $~122
                          *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          %                                              Date of Decision: 02.04.2026

                          +      W.P.(C) 4342/2026
                                 YASHVIR SINGH                                          .....Petitioner
                                                 Through:          Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Mr. Anikt
                                                                   Mutreja, Ms. Shivani, Ms. Kritika
                                                                   Matta, Ms. Tanya Rose and Mr.
                                                                   Pradeep Kumar, Advocates.
                                              versus
                                 RYAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL & ANR. & ORS.
                                                                           .....Respondents
                                              Through: Ms. Saumya Bajaj, Advocate.
                                 CORAM:
                                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

                          SACHIN DATTA, J. (ORAL)

CM APPLs.21140/2026, 21141/2026 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Applications stand disposed of.

W.P.(C) 4342/2026

3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the orders dated 11.03.2026 and 27.03.2026 passed in LID 328/18 by the POLC-III/Rouse Avenue Courts, New Delhi.

4. By way of order dated 27.03.2026 inter-alia the opportunity of petitioner to advance argument on its application seeking to recall one of the witnesses of respondent no.2 (i.e., M2W1 before Labour Court) for his further cross-examination, was closed.

5. It is noted that the aforesaid decision was primarily premised on the

ground that the cost/s as previously imposed by the Labour Court vide order dated 11.03.2026, remained unpaid.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the same was on account of a miscommunication and that the petitioner/workman is now willing to deposit the requisite cost imposed by the Labour Court.

7. Considering that the cause of substantive justice should not be allowed to be defeated on account of the lapse on the part of the workman, whose services were terminated many years ago; and considering the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner/workman to the effect that the requisite cost/s shall be deposited / paid, in compliance with the directions contained in the order dated 11.03.2026, the impugned order dated 27.03.2026 to the extent it closes the right of the petitioner to advance argument on its application seeking to recall of witness i.e., M2(W1) for his further cross-examination, as well as to advance final arguments, is set aside.

8. Let the said cost be deposited by the petitioner/workman within a period of ten days from today.

9. Subject to deposit of the requisite cost/s, the concerned Court shall re- consider the application of the petitioner seeking to recall the Management witness for his further cross-examination, and to address final arguments, taking into account the facts and circumstances.

10. The present petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

                          APRIL 2, 2026/at                                           SACHIN DATTA, J