9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 931X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revision No. 707 of 2010) whereby the learned single Judge of the High Court allowed the revision filed by the Respondent herein and set aside the order dated 25.02.2010 of the Additional District Judge, Delhi. 3. Brief facts: (a) The Appellant is a proprietorship concern dealing in interior decoration and construction work and Mr. Lalit Bagai is the sole proprietor of the said concern. The Respondent is a partnership firm registered with the Registrar of Firms vide Registration No. 1237/93 dated 07.06.1993 and is engaged in the business of sale and supply of building materials. (b) Admittedly, the Appellant and Respondent have often transacted with each other. According to the Respondent, the Appellant made various purchases on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Civil Revision No. 707 of 2010) before the High Court of Delhi. The learned single Judge of the High Court by impugned order dated 23.08.2011 allowed the revision and set aside the order dated 25.02.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge, Delhi. (e) Aggrieved by the said order, the Appellant has preferred this appeal by way of special leave. 4. Heard Mr. Siddharth Yadav, learned Counsel for the Appellant and Mr. Jinendra Jain, learned Counsel for the Respondent. 5. The only point for consideration in this appeal is whether the Plaintiff has made out a case for allowing the applications one filed under Order XVIII Rule 17 read with Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure and another application under Order VII Rule 14 read wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this rule shall apply to document produced for the cross examination of the Plaintiff's witnesses, or, handed over to a witness merely to refresh his memory. Order XVIII Rule 17 17. Court may recall and examine witness.- The Court may at any stage of a suit recall any witness who has been examined and may (subject to the law of evidence for the time being in force) put such questions to him as the Court thinks fit. Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure 151. Saving of inherent powers of Court.- Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect the inherent power of the Court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the Court. 7. Before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l up the lacunae in the evidence of the witness which has already been recorded but to clear any ambiguity that may have arisen during the course of his examination. 31. Some of the principles akin to Order 47 Code of Civil Procedure may be applied when a party makes an application under the provisions of Order 18 Rule 17 Code of Civil Procedure, but it is ultimately within the court's discretion, if it deems fit, to allow such an application. In the present appeal, no such case has been made out. 9. If we apply the principles enunciated in the above case and the limitation as explained with regard to the application under Order XVIII Rule 17, the applications filed by the Plaintiff have to be rejected. However, learned Counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... endering justice, and the court is satisfied that non-production earlier was for valid and sufficient reasons, the court may exercise its discretion to recall the witnesses or permit the fresh evidence. But if it does so, it should ensure that the process does not become a protracting tactic. The court should firstly award appropriate costs to the other party to compensate for the delay. Secondly, the court should take up and complete the case within a fixed time schedule so that the delay is avoided. Thirdly, if the application is found to be mischievous, or frivolous, or to cover up negligence or lacunae, it should be rejected with heavy costs. With these principles, let us consider the merits of the case in hand. 11. The perusal o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ise its discretion to permit reopening of evidence or recalling of witness for further examination/cross-examination after evidence led by the parties, in the light of the information as shown in the order of the trial Court, namely, those documents were very well available throughout the trial, we are of the view that even by exercise of Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, the Plaintiff cannot be permitted. 12. After change of various provisions by way of amendment in the Code of Civil Procedure, it is desirable that the recording of evidence should be continuous and followed by arguments and decision thereon within a reasonable time. This Court has repeatedly held that courts should constantly endeavour to follow such a time schedu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
