CHANDER SHEKHAR SETHI AND ANR vs VINOD SETHI

Judgment text excerpt

$~92 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 22nd, August, 2025 + CM(M) 1578/2025, CM APPL. 51902/2025 & CM APPL. 51903/2025 CHANDER SHEKHAR SETHI AND ANR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Anuroop P.S., Mr. Vikas Dudeja, Mr. Sachin Wadhwa and Mr. Gaurav Bidhuri, Advocates versus VINOD SETHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Somesh Arora, Mr. Aryan Arora, Ms. Reet Kaur Arora, Mr. Navneet K. Shukla and Ms. Richa Sharma, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner is defending a suit filed by his brother whereby his brother Mr. Vinod Sethi is seeking possession, mesne profits and injunction. 2. Plaintiff appeared for the purposes of leading evidence for the first time before the learned Trial Court on 17.05.2023. On that day, there was no appearance from the side of defendant and learned Trial Court recorded the evidence of PW1 Mr. Vinod Sethi and discharged him. Plaintiff’s evidence was also closed and the matter was fixed for defendant’s evidence. 3. An application was moved by the defendant on 12.09.2023 whereby he requested for one opportunity to cross-examine the plaintiff. According to defendant, non-appearance was solely for the reason that a wrong date had been noted in the diary maintained by clerk of his counsel. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 1578/2025 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:25.08.2025 15:24:18 4. Learned Trial Court discarded such reason and has, resultantly, dismissed the application moved under Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC. 5. Such order is under challenge. 6. As already noticed above, the suit is between the two brothers and the plaintiff is reportedly settled abroad. 7. During course of arguments, learned counsel for petitioner/defendant reiterated that aforesaid date was the first dat