Full Text
CM (M) 1234/2019 & CM APPLs. 37809/2019,37810/2019
USHA BHATT Petitioner
Through: Mr. Davinder N. Grover, Mr. Lakshay Mangla & Mr. Paras Poswal, Advocates (M-9811191401)
Through: None.
JUDGMENT
4 CM (M) 1235/2019 &CM APPLs. 37811/2019, 37812/2019 ANIL KUMAR Petitioner Through: Mr. Davinder N. Grover, Mr. Lakshay Mangla & Mr. Paras Poswal, Advocates (M-9811191401)
VERSUS
DADA DEV MANDIR PRABHANDAK SABHA Respondent Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH ORDER % 23.08.2019
1. The present petitions have been filed challenging the order dated 23"^ July, 2019 by which the Id. Trial Court dismissed the application for summoning of three witnesses to prove certain documents, which are not part ofthe record. The order ofthe Id. Trial Court reads as under: "A perusal ofthe application shows that the present application has been moved by the defendant for summoning of three witnesses to prove certain documents which are not the part of the record. 2019:DHC:7984 Moreover, none ofthe said documents are relevantfor adjudication of the issues settled by this court vide order dated 06.02.2019 after dismissal of application of defendant seeking permission to amend the written statement. The application of defendant for summoning of witnesses is accordingly dismissed. Put up for further proceedings on date already fixed i.e. on 30.07.2019. "
2. The case of the Petitioners-Defendants in the present petitions is that they have received certain documents by filing RTIs, which show that the Respondent-Plaintiff is not the owner ofthe property. It is submitted that the RTI replies were confronted to the witnesses of the Plaintiff, however, the said witnesses denied the same. If so, the said documents shall be considered for the purpose of final adjudication, provided the original/certified RTI replies are produced. It is for the Petitioners-Defendants to produce the RTI replies received from the relevant authority before the Id. Trial Court to make good their case. If the same are filed, they shall be considered in accordance with law.
3. With these observations, the petitions are disposed of. All pending applications also stand disposed of. LirtrU PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.