Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 24265 (HP)

M/S FAIRMOUNT HOTELS PVT LTD v. BHUPINDER SINGH THAKUR

CMPMO/507/2025 · 2025-08-28

Ajay Mohan Goel

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:HHC:29112 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 507 of 2025 Decided on: 28.08.2025 M/s Fairmount Hotels Pvt. Ltd. … Petitioner Versus Bhupinder Singh Thakur … Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ___________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani, Advocate. For the respondent : Notice not issued. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed order dated 28.03.2025, in terms whereof, an application filed by the petitioner under Order 8, Rule 1A (3) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, has been dismissed by learned Trial Court. 2. Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and having perused the impugned order, this Court does not find any infirmity therein. It is a matter of record that the examination of the witness of the plaintiff was conducted in the year 2023, whereas the order which now the petitioner intends to place on record is the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, dated 05.04.2018. Learned Counsel for the petitioner could not demonstrate that indeed this document was not available with the plaintiff before the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:29112 filing of the application. 3. Learned Counsel tried to make out a case by pleading that the Counsel earlier engaged by the petitioner inadvertently could not place said document on record earlier, however, this Court is of the considered view that this is no ground to allow a party to place on record a document at a belated stage just to fill up the lacunae in the case. 4. Accordingly, as this Court does not find any infirmity in the order, in terms whereof the application filed by the petitioner has been rejected for the reason that not only the application was filed at a belated stage but it could not be demonstrated that earlier the plaintiff was not in a position to produce said document on record, the present petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge August 28, 2025 (narender)