High CourtsSingle Bench

Mahendra Kumar Soni vs Jagdish Khare And Others

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 14 February 2022 · Citation: (2022) 02 MP CK 0098

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anjuli Palo, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 227 · Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order 17 Rule 1
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Petition No. 671 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

19 paragraphs · 372 words

Anjuli Palo, J

Though the matter is listed for orders on the question of admission as well as on stay application, however, it is finally heard. Further, considering the

nature of order which this Court is inclined to pass in the facts and circumstances of the case, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondents.

This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner/plaintiff being aggrieved by the order dated 19.01.2022

passed by the Ist Civil Judge, Senior Section, Chhatarpur (MP) in RCSA No. 45/2017.

An application under Order 17 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed by the petitioner before the trial Court seeking opportunity to adduce

witness. The trial Court rejected the said application on the ground that 27 opportunities were provided to the petitioner/plaintiff and even then, he is

seeking further time to adduce evidence. It was further observed that the petitioner/plaintiff is unnecessarily trying to prolong the case, hence the

application was dismissed and petitioner/plaintiff's right to adduce evidence was closed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner/plaintiff had sought adjournment on the ground of personal difficulty as well as his

advocate.

Considering the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the impugned order passed by the trial Court and looking to the facts and

circumstances of the case, in my considered opinion, one more opportunity may be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice to adduce his

evidence, subject to payment of cost, therefore, this petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 19.01.2022 is hereby set aside.

I t is directed that, subject to payment of cost of Rs. 7,500/- to the respondent No.1 within 15 days from the date of this order, the trial Court shall

afford one opportunity to the petitioner to adduce evidence on a date to be fixed by that Court. Thereafter, the trial Court shall proceed in accordance

with law. Petitioner/plaintiff shall keep the witness(es) present before the trial Court on the said date, without fail otherwise no further opportunity

shall be provided to the petitioner in this regard.

With the aforesaid direction, this petition is allowed to the extent mentioned above and disposed of.