MARRY MESSY vs NAVEEN BEHAL

Judgment text excerpt

$~62 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 21st April, 2025 + CM(M) 681/2025 & CM APPL. 21572/2025 MARRY MESSY .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Shasha Jain with Mr. Tarun Lai, Advocates. versus NAVEEN BEHAL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Jitin Tewatia, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner is defending a suit for recovery of possession, arrears of rent and mesne profits. 2. Plaintiff-Mr. Naveen Behal entered into witness box and closed his evidence. When the case was at the stage of evidence of the defendant, instead of leading evidence, certain applications were moved by the defendant. 3. According to petitioner/defendant, she did not submit evidence-affidavits immediately as she was, somehow, under the impression that a direction to that effect would come only after her applications were disposed of. It is submitted that defendant never had any intention to prolong Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 681/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:23.04.2025 11:19:16 the matter and to delay the proceedings unnecessarily and delay has occurred solely on the account of the fact that she had filed several applications and was under the impression that the affidavits would be required to be submitted, once those applications were disposed of. 4. This Court has gone through the order dated 07.12.2024 whereby the applications moved by the defendants were dismissed and simultaneously, her right to lead evidence was closed. 5. The subsequent orders dated 03.12.2025 and 22.03.2025 have also been seen. 6. During course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant has restricted her relief only with respect to grant of permission to defendant-Marry Messy and her husband to enter into witness box.