SH.RAJESH KUMAR & ANR. vs SMT.DHARAM KUMARI@POOJA

Judgment text excerpt

$~87 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 29th April, 2025 + CM(M) 285/2025 SH.RAJESH KUMAR & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Mahender Shukla, Advocate. versus SMT.DHARAM KUMARI@POOJA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Akash Jain, Advocate for R-1 & 2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioners herein are defending a suit for partition, possession and permanent injunction. 2. During the pendency of the abovesaid suit, the defendants (defendant nos. 1 & 2) sought permission to amend their written statement and such request was allowed by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 28.07.2022, subject to cost of Rs. 5000/-. 3. When the abovesaid suit was taken up on 19.09.2024, the learned Trial Court observed that the cost of Rs. 5000/-, which was later on reduced to Rs.3000/-, was still unpaid and observing that there was no appearance either from the side of the defendants, their opportunity to cross-examine PW was struck off. 4. When an application was moved under Section 151 CPC, seeking recall of the abovesaid order, such request was also turned down vide order dated 11.03.2025 holding that it was rather an application seeking review, which was Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 285/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:01.05.2025 16:26:45 barred by time. 5. Mr. Akash Jain, learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff has joined the proceeding through video conferencing and when asked, he submitted that on 19.09.2024, the concerned witness i.e. PW Dharam Kumari @ Pooja was though present but her such presence is not reflected in the proceedings. He, in all fairness, admits that her affidavit for the purposes of examination-in-chief was not tendered in evidence by that time. 6. In view of the abovesaid, the