SANTOSH DEVI vs NAVEEN KUMAR

Judgment text excerpt

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:18th July, 2025 + CM(M) 3484/2024 & CM APPL. 56771/2024 SANTOSH DEVI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Saurabh Khosla and Mr. Arachit Gupta, Advocates versus NAVEEN KUMAR .....Respondent Through: Respondent-in-person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner is plaintiff before the learned Trial Court. 2. When the matter was taken up by the learned Trial Court on 22.05.2023, it closed the right of the plaintiff to lead remaining evidence. On that day, matter was listed for the plaintiff’s evidence and the impugned order also records that no PW was present despite service. If the witness was duly summoned and was not present despite service, the learned Trial Court should have, rather, taken further steps in order to secure their presence/attendance before the Court as per Civil Procedure Code. 3. Fact, however, remains that keeping in mind the fact that matter was listed for evidence since the year 2020 and number of opportunities had already been granted to the plaintiff, the learned Trial Court came to the opinion that perhaps plaintiff was not interested in leading any further evidence and has, thus, closed her right to lead further evidence. 4. When an application under Section 151 CPC was moved seeking recall of such order, such application has also been dismissed on 30.11.2023. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 3484/2024 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:21.07.2025 14:31:33 5. Such orders are under challenge. 6. Respondent Mr. Naveen Kumar, who is defending the aforesaid suit, has joined the proceedings through videoconferencing. 7. Though the case was lying pending for plaintiff’s evidence in the year 2020, in view of the pandemic of Covid-2019, in the interreg