The Single Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of Hardev Dohil Since Deceased Though His Lrs & Anr. vs Punjab National Bank consisting of Justice C. Hari Shankar held that the only ground on which the learned ADJ had refused the petitioner’s request to confront DW-1 with the photographs in question was that the date on which they were taken was not forthcoming, which could not constitute a valid basis for refusing the request of the petitioner.
Facts
This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India was filed assailing the order passed by the learned Additional District Judge to the extent the said order disallowed the request of learned Counsel for the petitioner (as the plaintiff in the said suit) for permission to confront the respondent’s witness DW-1 (S.K. Goyal) with certain photographs and the negatives thereof since the photographs did not indicate the date on which they were taken.
Learned Counsel for the respondent, to a query from the Court, fairly acknowledged that the mere absence of the date, on which they were taken, not being forthcoming on the photographs, may not suffice as a ground to reject the request of the petitioner to be permitted to confront DW-1 with the said photographs. However, he submits that there were other reasons why the witness could not be permitted to be confronted with the said photographs.
Observations of the Court
The Bench noted that:
“There is no principle known to the law which permits a Court to reject a request for putting a particular document to a witness on such a ground. Needless to say, the response that the witness may tender, if the photographs were put to him, may be of use to the petitioner; or it may not. If the respondent is of the opinion that the photographs were inadmissible in evidence or that the response given by the witness to the query put to him in that regard is of no consequence to the case that the petitioner seeks to set up, that would be a matter for the respondent to urge and argue when the matter is heard on merits by the learned Trial Court.”
Relying on Sadhana Lodh v. National Insurance Co. Ltd, it was noted that the court is ordinarily not expected to enter into the correctness or otherwise of the order passed by the Court below while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
It opined that the only ground on which the learned ADJ refused the petitioner’s request to confront DW-1 with the photographs in question was that the date on which they were taken was not forthcoming and the said ground could not constitute a valid basis for refusing the request of the petitioner.
Judgment
The impugned order, to the extent it refused the petitioner’s request to confront DW-1 with photographs on the ground that the date on which they were taken was not forthcoming, was quashed and set aside.
Case: Hardev Dohil Since Deceased Though His Lrs & Anr. vs Punjab National Bank
Citation: CM(M) 566/2022 & CM APPL.27433/2022
Bench: Justice C. Hari Shankar
Decided on: 16th August 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
