M/S DEN DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT NETWORKS PVT LTD vs M/S EXPLORER ASSOCIATES

Judgment text excerpt

$~97 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 26.09.2025 + CM(M) 1921/2025, CM APPL. 61750/2025 & CM APPL. 61751/2025 M/S DEN DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT NETWORKS PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Preetpal Singh and Ms. Priya Puri, Advocates. versus M/S EXPLORER ASSOCIATES & ANR. .....Respondents Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA ORDER (ORAL) 1. Petitioner/defendant no.1 has assailed order dated 28.07.2025 of the learned trial court, whereby prior to commencement of evidence of the petitioner/defendant no.1, application of respondent/plaintiff was allowed, thereby permitting him to lead additional evidence. 2. Having heard learned counsel for petitioner/defendant no.1, I do not find it a fit case to issue notice to the other side. CM(M) 1921/2025 Page 1 of 3 pages Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA Signature Not Verified GIRISH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec455 69af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, KATHPALIA postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570 Digitally Signed 996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2025.09.26 14:00:45 -07'00' By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Date:26.09.2025 15:49:49 3. It is contended by learned counsel for petitioner/defendant no.1 that by way of impugned order, the respondent/plaintiff has been given an opportunity to plug loopholes, so the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law. It is contended that no reasonable explanation has been tendered by the respondent/plaintiff for having closed their evidence midway without examining all the witnesses. No other argument has been advanced. 4. As reflected from the impugned order, it is after closing of plaintiff’s evidence but prior to te