JAGDISH LAL SACHDEVA vs DHARAM SINGH & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~87 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 22nd July, 2025 + CM(M) 1033/2025 & CM APPL. 33819-33820/2025 JAGDISH LAL SACHDEVA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Alok Dev and Mr. Adamaya Pal Singh, Advocates alongwith petitioner in Person. versus DHARAM SINGH & ORS. .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Since there was no appearance from the side of the respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 despite service, the matter was passed over but when it was taken up after lunch, again, there is no representation from the side of those respondents who are duly served. 2. The point involved is very short. 3. The petitioner is plaintiff No.1 before the learned Trial Court and appeared before the learned Trial Court on 29.04.2025 for the purposes of recording of his evidence. 4. The learned Trial Court, observing that he was not interested in entering into witness box, discharged him and has also closed evidence of plaintiff. 5. Such order dated 29.04.2025 is under challenge. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 1033/2025 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:24.07.2025 16:05:25 6. The contention made by the plaintiffs is to the effect that since plaintiff No.1 was not conversant with English language and his counsel was not present in the Court at the relevant time, he, merely, wanted to wait for his counsel, so that, in the presence of his counsel, he is cross-examined by his adversary. 7. It is submitted that despite the fact that the counsel for the plaintiff also appeared before the learned Trial Court in the process, learned Trial Court, still, closed the opportunity of the plaintiff to lead evidence. 8. Undoubtedly, when the matter was earlier taken up by the learned Trial Court on 16.01.2025, the plaintiff had