Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

1980 DAILYLAW 371 (DEL)

SOMVEER SINGH v. KARAMVIR SINGH

CM(M)/1980/2026 · 2026-09-09

Ajay Digpaul

body1980

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

$~71 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010425402026 + CM(M) 1980/2026 & CM APPL. 60980/2026 & CM APPL. 60981/2026 SOMVEER SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. K. K. Pradhan, Advocate versus KARAMVIR SINGH .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL O R D E R % 09.09.2026 1. Through the present petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the orders dated 30.01.2026 and 03.07.2026 whereby the learned trial court dismissed the petitioner/defendant’s application under Order XVI Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 2. The brief facts of the present case are as follows – 3. The respondent/plaintiff instituted the underlying suit seeking recovery of Rs. 13,00,000, which the petitioner states to be a friendly loan. 4. The learned trial court on 18.10.2025 noted that the matter had been put for DE since 17.01.2025, and despite the pendency, no witness has been examined, and even on that date, no witness was present for examination. Accordingly, DE was closed, and the matter was put up for final arguments. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/09/2026 at 15:51:08 5. The petitioner challenged the order dated 18.10.2025 which was heard by the learned trial court on 30.01.2026. On that day, upon the petitioner’s statement that only he be examined as a witness, the respondent’s consent thereto, and subject to cost of Rs. 3,000, the learned trial court allowed the petitioner one last and final opportunity to examine himself as a witness. Accordingly, affidavit of evidence was directed to be filed. 6. Meanwhile, the petitioner on 24.03.2026 filed an application under Order XVI Rule 1 seeking to summon the witnesses named in his list of witnesses for examination. He contended inter-alia that examining the witnesses was necessary to bring on record the numerous complaints between the contesting parties qua the property. 7. The application came to be dismissed vide order dated 03.07.2026. The learned trial court noted that the matter has been fixed for DE since a long time, and the petitioner’s identical request had already been dismissed vide order dated 30.01.2026 wherein a limited liberty to examine himself had been granted. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the right to lead evidence is an irrefutable right which is necessary for the petitioner’s defense in the case. Closing that right will lead to significant and irreparable prejudice, and will leave the petitioner’s defense hollow. 9. He has further submitted that the summoning, and subsequent examination of these witnesses will not change the nature of the defense as the petitioner seeks to summon the official record keepers in order to prove the photocopies of documents which are already on record. He has requested that his application be allowed subject to terms as this Court may see fit. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/09/2026 at 15:51:08 10. This Court is of the opinion that the matter had been placed for final arguments since 19.12.2025 and that DE had been pending since 17.01.2025. Allowing the application at this stage, after a period of 9 months approximately would set the clock back on an already delayed trial. Furthermore, turning the clock back would also render the intent of speedy adjudication otiose. 11. Furthermore, a bare perusal of the order dated 30.01.2026 would show that upon the petitioner’s statement, a limited opportunity had already been given to the petitioner to examine himself as a witness. The petitioner cannot now, after 8 months, be allowed to resile from his statement and lead fresh evidence. 12. Accordingly, the petition along with pending applications, if any, is dismissed. AJAY DIGPAUL, J SEPTEMBER 9, 2026 gs/sg This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/09/2026 at 15:51:08