JANKI DEVI vs ANITA & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 20th April, 2026 + CM(M) 772/2026, CM APPL. 23074/2026 & CM APPL. 23075/2026 JANKI DEVI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. M. S. I. Israily, Advocate. versus ANITA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA ORDER (Oral) Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J. 1. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the impugned order dated 19th March, 2026, passed by the learned Trial Court in CS No. 78/2022, whereby an application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Section 148 (1) of Indian Evidence Act, seeking recall of order dated 15th November, 2025, has been dismissed. 3. Heard. Record perused. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the learned Trial Court has disallowed Question No. 10 put to DW-1 without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case. It is further submitted that unless the petitioner is permitted to cross-examine the DW-1 on the said aspect, grave prejudice would be caused to the petitioner. Learned Counsel for the Signature Not Verified Signed By:VAISHALI CM(M) 772/2026 Page 1 of 3 CHAUHAN Signing Date:21.04.2026 11:19:42 petitioner has also placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in W.P.(CRL) 448/2013 titled Irfan Badshah V State. 5. Perusal of the record shows that DW-1, Ms. Anita, has already been examined, cross-examined and discharged. The relevant portion of the cross-examination, where Question No. 10 has been disallowed, reads as under: “10. My husband Raju expired in May, 2020 during covid period. Raju was being treated at Safdarjung Hospital, Delhi. I expended a