Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12132 (DEL)

AYUSH AGGARWAL v. NARESH GUPTA

CM(M)/418/2026 · 2026-07-16

Ajay Digpaul

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 418/2026 AYUSH AGGARWAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Surya Pratap Sirohi and Mr. Abhin Behl, Advs. versus NARESH GUPTA .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL O R D E R % 16.07.2026 1. Through the present petition under article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order dated 18.12.2025 and 05.02.2026 by which the petitioner’s evidence was closed, and the application seeking recall was dismissed respectively. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff’ has submitted that he had established sufficient cause for the absence and failure to lead evidence on the prescribed dates by showing the medical reports directing bed rest, and the learned trial court has erred in not considering and closing the petitioner’s evidence. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the closure of petitioner’s substantial rights to examine material witnesses causes grave and serious prejudice to the petitioner, especially considering that sufficient cause was shown for the absence. 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 18/07/2026 at 11:22:44 4. A conspectus of both the orders viz. 18.12.2025 and 05.02.2026 makes it clear that the issues in the underlying suit were framed in 2022, and since then, the petitioner has been afforded numerous opportunities to lead evidence, despite which, he has repeatedly failed to do so. Furthermore, the medical reports directing bed rest are only for a period of six days viz. 16.12.2025 to 21.12.2025, thus, establishing that the petitioner was not precluded from leading evidence on the other opportunities. 5. Accordingly, this court finds no ground to intervene. 6. The petition, along with pending application(s), if any, stands dismissed in limine. AJAY DIGPAUL, J JULY 16, 2026/vs/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 18/07/2026 at 11:22:44