COL RAJESH SINGH GAUR & ANR. vs NITYANAND GAUTAM & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~85 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:18th July, 2025 + CM(M) 1272/2025 & CM APPL. 42593-42595/2025 COL RAJESH SINGH GAUR & ANR. .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Garima Sharma and Ms. Mahak Rathree, Advocates versus NITYANAND GAUTAM & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Tushar Giri, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioners are defending a suit for possession, arrears of rent and injunction. 2. The defence of the petitioners has already been struck off and when the plaintiff i.e. PW1 Mr. Nityanand Gautam was present for cross-examination, the cross-examination could not take place on account of non-availability of main counsel. 3. Learned Trial Court, in its order dated 26.04.2025, recorded that said witness i.e. plaintiff was a senior citizen aged 82 years and the request of adjournment was causing undue harassment to him and, resultantly, the plaintiff’s evidence was closed. 4. Fact, however, remains that petitioner has also taken exception to earlier order dated 12.12.2023, whereby their defence had been struck off and order dated 19.12.2024, whereby their application moved under Section 151 CPC seeking recall of such order was dismissed. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 1272/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:19.07.2025 13:26:28 5. However, during course of arguments, learned counsel for petitioner has restricted their present petition only in relation to order dated 26.04.2025. She submits that in case one opportunity is granted, they would ensure that the witness is cross-examined, within the rights available to them. 6. Learned counsel for respondents/plaintiffs appears on advance notice and submits that though the petitioner does not deserve any further opportunity but he would hav