RAMESH YADAV vs SUNITA YADAV

Judgment text excerpt

$~113 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 19th August, 2025 + CM(M) 1427/2025 & CM APPL. 46903-46904/2025 & CM APPL. 47920-47922/2025 RAMESH YADAV .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Chetanya Puri, Advocate. versus SUNITA YADAV .....Respondent Through: Mr. Praveen Suri, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner, as defendant No. 1 before the learned Trial Court, is defending a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction. 2. The grievance raised in the present petition is with respect to two different orders. 3. The first order is dated 23.07.2025 whereby application moved by defendant No.1 under Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC has been dismissed. By virtue of the abovesaid application, defendant No.1 was seeking recall of plaintiff (PW-1 Sunita Yadav) on the ground that certain essential questions, which were relevant for the fair disposal of the suit, could not be put to her by the previous counsel. 4. The abovesaid application has been dismissed by the learned Trial Court, while also echoing the fact that a witness cannot be permitted to call again, merely because of the fact that there is a change in the counsel. It also noticed that the application was vague and did not contain material particulars and it was not, even, divulged as to what relevant questions had been left out and it was in the abovesaid premise that the learned Trial Court had dismissed Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 1427/2025 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:20.08.2025 19:09:31 the abovesaid application, subject to cost of Rs. 10,000/-. 5. After having heard the learned counsel for parties, and going through the impugned order, this Court does not find any element of illegality or perversity in the abovesaid order dated 23.07.2025