Full Text
Date of Decision: 23.11.2023
SAURABH BANSAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Adv.
Through: Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv.
JUDGMENT
1. This petition impugns the order dated 31.08.2022 passed by AdditionalDistrict Judge-02,Shadara, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (‘Trial Court’)in Civil Suit No. 436/2016 titled Nitin Gupta vs. Saurabh Bansal dismissing the application filed by the Petitioner under Order IX Rule 7 CPC.
2. The Trial Court vide order dated 15.07.2022 closed the right of the Petitioner to cross-examine PW-1 and proceeded ex-parte against the defendant. The Petitionerfiled an applicationon the same date for setting asidethe ex-parteorder;however, the said application has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 31.08.2022.
2.1. The Petitioner is the defendant and the Respondent is the plaintiff. The suit has been filed for recovery of a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- + interest.
3. At the outset, learned counselfor theRespondentstatesthathehas no objection if the petition is allowed, subject to the Petitioner being put to strict terms withrespect to his futureparticipationin thetrialand paymentof legal costs for the delay caused.
4. In reply, learned counselfor the Petitioner states that he shall tender costs ofRs. 10,000/-and cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the suit.
5. With theconsent ofthe parties,thepresentpetitionis allowed subject to the following directions: -
5.1. The PetitionershallpaycostsofRs. 10,000/-to theRespondent on or before 03.12.2024.
5.2. The Petitioner will complete the cross-examination of PW-1 on the next date fixed by the Trial Court without seeking any adjournment or accommodation.
5.3. An adjournment will be sought jointly before the Trial Court on 25.11.2023, with the request to fix the next date of hearing for the crossexamination of PW-1.
5.4. The Petitionerwill file the proposedlist of witnesseson the next date of hearing fixed by the Trial Court.
5.5. The Petitionerwill be duly represented through a counselon each date of hearingand not seek any adjournment or accommodation. It is directed that if the Petitioner fails to appear through its counsel, the learned Trial court will be at liberty to close thedefendant’sevidenceas per its discretion.
6. This direction at para[5].[5] has been issued in view of the pastrecord of theproceedings includingtheorderdated 12.02.2020passed in CM(M) NO. 175/2020 and the impugned order dated 31.08.2022. The Petitioner is cautioned to remaindiligent in defendingthe suit consideringhis pastrecord of default in this matter.
7. The learned counsel for the parties undertakes to comply with the aforesaid directions.
8. The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Pending applications shall stand disposed of. Interim order dated 17.10.2022 stand vacated.