Full Text
Translation output
$-22& 23 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CM(M)282/2020 i& CM APPLs.8360/2020,8361/2020
^ CM(M)283/2020&CM APPLs.8368/2020,8369/2020 M/S S N ELECTRICALS Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rishab Raj Jain & Mr. Sharique Hussain,Advocates(M-9811079695)
CM(M)282/2020 i& CM APPLs.8360/2020,8361/2020
^ CM(M)283/2020&CM APPLs.8368/2020,8369/2020 M/S S N ELECTRICALS Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rishab Raj Jain & Mr. Sharique Hussain,Advocates(M-9811079695)
VERSUS
NBCC SERVICE LIMITED & ANR Respondents
Through: Mr. Gudipati G. Kashyap & Mr. K.
Sharat Kumar, Advocates (M- Q 9958832068)
Through: Mr. Gudipati G. Kashyap & Mr. K.
Sharat Kumar, Advocates (M- Q 9958832068)
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M.SINGH
03.03.2020 The present petitions arise outoftwo suits for recovery.One has been filed by the Respondents/Plaintiffs - NBCC Service Limited and NBCC
(India) Ltd. (hereinafter, "Plaintiffs") against the Petitioner/Defendant -
M/s S.N.Electricals (hereinafter, 'Defendant")for a sum ofRs.28,86,734/- and a counter-suit has been filed by the Petitioner against the Respondents for asum ofRs.50,43,643/-.Both suits are pending beforethe Trial Court.
Vide order dated 2"'^ August,2019,atjointrequest ofthe counsel,the two suits were consolidated for the purpose of recording evidence. The
Plaintiffs filed the affidavit oftheir witness PW-1 i.e., Mr.Amarendra Das, on IP^ March,2019 and the same was tendered. The matter was adjourned to 2"''August,2019 for cross-examination.On 2"^ August,2019,the matter wasfurther adjourned to 20^^December,2019for cross-examination ofPW-
1.
2020:DHC:3877 On 20^^ December,2019,as Id. counsel for the Defendant was held up. in another court a pass-over was sought. The matter was passed over twice and was thereafter taken up at 11.50 a.m. Since the Defendant's counsel could notreach,the opportunity to cross-examinePW-1 was closed.
Ld. counsel for the Defendant submits that he was held up in the Tis
Hazari Courts where arguments were being heard in another matter and accordingly,he could notreach the Saket Courts in time.It is submitted that there was no intention to delay the matter.
This Courthas perused the court diary ofthe counsel as also the order passed in the other matter where the counsel was busy and arguments were being heard. This Court is convinced that there was no negligence on the partofthe counsel.In any case,the litigant oughtnotto be allowed to suffer on account ofits counsel being held-up in another Court. Accordingly, an opportunity for cross-examination ofPW-1 is granted,subjecttoterms.
The Defendant shall now cross-examine the Plaintiffs' witness on the next date fixed before the Trial Court, subject to lump sum costs of
Rs.10,000/- being paid to the witness. The Defendant shall ensure that it does notseek any unnecessiary adjournments before the Trial Court or delay the matter in any manner.
With these observations, both the petitions are disposed of. All pending applications are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M.SINGBf,J /ilARCH03,2020 (^ahul/^ 2020:DHC:3877
03.03.2020 The present petitions arise outoftwo suits for recovery.One has been filed by the Respondents/Plaintiffs - NBCC Service Limited and NBCC
(India) Ltd. (hereinafter, "Plaintiffs") against the Petitioner/Defendant -
M/s S.N.Electricals (hereinafter, 'Defendant")for a sum ofRs.28,86,734/- and a counter-suit has been filed by the Petitioner against the Respondents for asum ofRs.50,43,643/-.Both suits are pending beforethe Trial Court.
Vide order dated 2"'^ August,2019,atjointrequest ofthe counsel,the two suits were consolidated for the purpose of recording evidence. The
Plaintiffs filed the affidavit oftheir witness PW-1 i.e., Mr.Amarendra Das, on IP^ March,2019 and the same was tendered. The matter was adjourned to 2"''August,2019 for cross-examination.On 2"^ August,2019,the matter wasfurther adjourned to 20^^December,2019for cross-examination ofPW-
1.
2020:DHC:3877 On 20^^ December,2019,as Id. counsel for the Defendant was held up. in another court a pass-over was sought. The matter was passed over twice and was thereafter taken up at 11.50 a.m. Since the Defendant's counsel could notreach,the opportunity to cross-examinePW-1 was closed.
Ld. counsel for the Defendant submits that he was held up in the Tis
Hazari Courts where arguments were being heard in another matter and accordingly,he could notreach the Saket Courts in time.It is submitted that there was no intention to delay the matter.
This Courthas perused the court diary ofthe counsel as also the order passed in the other matter where the counsel was busy and arguments were being heard. This Court is convinced that there was no negligence on the partofthe counsel.In any case,the litigant oughtnotto be allowed to suffer on account ofits counsel being held-up in another Court. Accordingly, an opportunity for cross-examination ofPW-1 is granted,subjecttoterms.
The Defendant shall now cross-examine the Plaintiffs' witness on the next date fixed before the Trial Court, subject to lump sum costs of
Rs.10,000/- being paid to the witness. The Defendant shall ensure that it does notseek any unnecessiary adjournments before the Trial Court or delay the matter in any manner.
With these observations, both the petitions are disposed of. All pending applications are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M.SINGBf,J /ilARCH03,2020 (^ahul/^ 2020:DHC:3877
JUDGMENT