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
7 paragraphs · 312 wordsSanjay K. Agrawal, J
This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 21/06/2019 passed in Civil Suit No. 03-A/2013 by learned 1 st Civil Judge Class - II, Durg to the Court of 3 rd Additional Civil Judge, Durg whereby petitioners/defendants opportunity to lead evidence has been closed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on 18/06/2019, cross-examination of petitioner/defendant No. 1 was started but due to the lack of time, the case was adjourned for 20/06/2019. On 20/06/2019 and then on 21/06/2019, the case was again fixed for cross-examination of petitioners/defendants, but because petitioner/defendant No. 1 had undergone surgery, he was advised for complete bed rest, and therefore, he could not be present for the cross-examination. It was totally unsustainable on the part of the trial Court to close petitioners'/defendants' opportunity to lead evidence by the impugned order, without taking into consideration the valid reason behind his absence. As such, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
Mr. Ankit Singhal, learned counsel for the respondents opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and went through the records with utmost circumspection.
Taking into consideration that petitioner/defendant No. 1 was present before the trial Court on 18/06/2019 and thereafter, he had undergone surgery that is why he could not remain present before the Court on the two subsequent dates, learned trial Court is absolutely unjustified in closing petitioners'/defendants' opportunity to lead evidence, as such, the impugned order is hereby set aside. Now, the petitioner No. 1/defendant No. 1 will be cross-examined on 15/07/2019 before the trial Court, as agreed by learned counsel for the parties.
With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands disposed of. No cost(s).