Avtar Singh v. Usman Khan & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 O. XXI r. 32
Judgment
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Vinod Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Ranjan Lakhanpal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated
10.12.2011 passed by the learned court below, whereby the evidence of the petitioner was closed by order. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he only prays for grant of one opportunity for concluding his evidence. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any merit in the submissions made. The dispute arise out of an application filed by the petitioner under Order XXI Rule 32 CPC and Court of Contempt Act on 16.7.2004. In about eight years, the petitioner could not conclude his evidence despite grant of numerous opportunities. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in M/s Shiv Cotex vs Tirgun Auto Plast Private Limited and others (2012-1) PLR 407, opined that unless a case is made out for grant of opportunity for leading evidence beyond three dates of hearing as provided in CPC, no further opportunity should be granted. Considering the aforesaid facts, I do not find any merit in the present petition. The same is, accordingly, dismissed.
2.3.2012 vs. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.