SANJIV MAHAJAN Vs. KISHORE KUMAR KHANNA
LAWS(DLH)-2013-10-371
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on October 29,2013

SANJIV MAHAJAN Appellant
VERSUS
Kishore Kumar Khanna Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

HARKESH SINGH VS. VED RAJ [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The defendants had filed an affidavit of evidence along with large number of copies of documents. The plaintiff filed application being I.A. 142/2013 objecting to taking on record of the affidavit of evidence and the documents. The defendant filed I.A. 14181/2013 seeking condonation of delay in filing affidavit and documents. The respective applications were replied and contested by the parties.
(2.)The defendants submit that vide order dated 5th November, 2012 this Court directed them to file affidavit of evidence within four weeks. The date of recording of evidence before the Local Commissioner being of 14th December 2012, they supplied copy of the affidavit with copies of documents to the plaintiff's counsel on 12th December, 2012 and submitted the affidavit of evidence and documents before the Local Commissioner on 14th December 2012 and since there was change of Manager of the defendants, the documents could not be traced earlier, but they could be traced only when the deponent of the affidavit Mr. Khullar took over the charge, that the documents were traced with great efforts and it was because of this that there was delay of 8 days in filing affidavit and the copies of documents. The defendants have prayed for condonation of this delay of 8 days.
(3.)On the other hand, the plaintiff has chosen not only to reply and contest the above application of the defendants, but had earlier filed a separate application being I.A.14281/2012 objecting to the taking on record of the affidavit of evidence as also the documents. The plaintiff submits that it is not only the delay of 8 days, as alleged by the defendants, but the copies of the documents which are sought to be filed along with the affidavit could not be taken on record as neither any leave was taken from the Court before filing these documents, nor any cause much less sufficient has been set out as to non filing of these documents along with the plaint or before the settlement of issues. Further, it is also the plaintiff's case that, in any case the copies of the documents which are sought to be filed along with the affidavit could not be proved in the statement of witness as these documents are the photocopies of debit notes in the names of the third parties. The learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff has taken me through the proceedings to highlight the conduct of the defendants in having delayed the trial.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.