VISHAL SEHGAL vs RUNGTA IRRIGATION LTD

Judgment text excerpt

$~71 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 13th May, 2025 + CM(M) 892/2025 & CM APPL. 28879/2025 & CM APPL. 28880/2025 VISHAL SEHGAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Karanpreet Singh, Advocate. versus RUNGTA IRRIGATION LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rajit Ghosh, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Petitioner herein has filed a suit for recovery which is commercial in nature. 2. When the matter was taken learned District Judge, Commercial Court on 26.11.2024, notional issues were framed. It was for the reason that the period of outer limit for filing written statement had yet not elapsed. 3. Fact remains that thereafter, defendant participated in the proceedings and also filed their written statement and on 14.01.2025, additional issues were also framed, based on such written statement. 4. The grievance in the present petition is very limited. 5. It is submitted that the learned District Judge, Commercial Court referred the parties to learned Local Commissioner for recording of evidence and the evidence of plaintiff Mr. Vishal Sehgal, as PW-1, has already been recorded but when the matter was, eventually, taken up by learned District Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CM(M) 892/2025 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:15.05.2025 11:42:11 Judge, Commercial Court on 29.04.2025, noticing that the evidence had not been timely concluded by the plaintiff, its opportunity to lead further evidence has been closed. 6. It is submitted that the defendant, themselves, made a request on 24.04.2025 in whatsapp group created by learned Local Commissioner and, therefore, plaintiff did not bring his witness for the purposes of examination. 7. It is informed that petitioner/plaintiff is merely required to examine one Ms. Asha w