RAJU vs SMT. K. PALANIAMMAL & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~73 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 27thMarch,2026 + CM(M) 646/2026, CM APPL. 19284/2026 & CM APPL. 19285/2026 RAJU .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Lavisha Arora, Advocate. versus SMT. K. PALANIAMMAL& 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 by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, assailing the impugned order dated 23rd February, 2026, passed by the learned trial court in CS No. 323/2017, whereby an application under Order XVIII Rule 17 of CPC filed by the petitioner/defendant for setting aside the order dated 06th September, 2023 whereby the right of the petitioner to cross-examine the respondent’s witness has been closed, has been dismissed. 3. Heard. Record perused. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner was not in a position to cross-examine the PW-1 due to his medical conditions. It is further submitted that grave prejudice would be caused to the case of the petitioner in case the petitioner was not granted an opportunity to Signature Not Verified Signed By:NAMITA CM(M) 646/2026 Page 1 of 3 DHYANI Signing Date:28.03.2026 11:50:28 cross-examine PW-1. 5. It is relevant here to mention that the petitioner has not challenged the order dated 06th September, 2023, which reads as follows: “Heard. Perused. Final opportunity was granted to the defendant for cross examining the witness. Today also witness is also not cross examined. Accordingly, right to cross examine the plaintiff's witness is closed.” 6. The relevant portion of the impugned order dated 23rd February, 2026 reads as follows: “From the perusal of re