Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sanjay Bhatia & Anr vs Samakshi Bhatia on 18 September, 2024

Author: Navin Chawla

Bench: Navin Chawla

                             $~13
                             *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                             +    CS(OS) 264/2019
                                  SANJAY BHATIA & ANR.                       .....Plaintiffs
                                                  Through: Mr.Vikas Arora & Mr.Sachin
                                                           Arora, Advs.
                                                  versus
                                  SAMAKSHI BHATIA                            .....Defendant
                                                  Through: Ms.Malavika Rajkotia &
                                                           Ms.Akriti Tyagi, Advs. along
                                                           with the defendant present in
                                                           person.

                                   CORAM:
                                   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
                                                ORDER

% 18.09.2024 I.A. 13206/2019

1. The learned counsel for the defendant prays for leave to withdraw the present application.

2. The application is dismissed as withdrawn.

3. This application has been filed by the defendant seeking condonation of 6 days' delay in the filing of the written statement.

4. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned.

5. The application is disposed of.

6. This application has been filed by the defendant seeking leave of this Court to place on record certain additional documents, which are mentioned in the application as under:

"a. A copy of the Family Constitution dated October 2016 (Ref: Paragraph No.4, 5 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 23/09/2024 at 21:22:23 and 35 of the Brief Submissions of the Written Statement filed by the Defendant) b. A copy of the Memorandum of Family Settlement (Ref: Paragraph No. 24, 25 and 26 of the Brief Submissions of the Written Statement filed by the Defendant) c. A copy of email dated 03.04.2019 sent by the Plaintiff to the Defendant refused to pay the school fee of the Defendant's son (Ref: Paragraph No.3 of the Para wise Reply to the Written Statement filed by the Defendant)."

7. The learned counsel for the plaintiffs submits that the said documents have been referred by the defendant in her written statement. It was only on 01.07.2024, during the plaintiffs' cross- examination, that it came to the knowledge of the defendant that the aforesaid documents were not a part of the record of the Court. She submits that the said documents have been filed in other litigations between the parties, including a suit praying for partition, being CS(OS) 145/2021, titled Samakshi Bhatia And Anr. v. Sanjay Bhatia And Ors., a maintenance suit, being HAM No. 05/2019, titled Samakshi Bhatia and Anr. v. Sanjay Bhatia and Ors., and the complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, being CC No. 8976/2019, titled Samakshi Bhatia v. Sanjay Bhatia and Ors.. She submits that the relevance of these documents can be considered by this Court only at an appropriate stage, however, in case if they are not taken on record, grave prejudice would be caused to the defendant.

8. The learned counsel for the defendant also draws the attention 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 23/09/2024 at 21:22:23 of this Court to the question nos. 95 to 97 asked to PW-1- Mr.Sanjay Bhatia during the course of the cross-examination recorded by the learned Local Commissioner on 01.07.2024. He submits that it was only at that stage that it was found that the documents were not on the record.

9. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the plaintiffs submits that the application gives no reason for not filing the said documents on record prior to the date of filing of the present application. He submits that PW-1 was examined on various dates and the examination of the plaintiffs already stands closed. He submits that the said documents, therefore, cannot be taken on record.

10. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties.

11. Admittedly, the said documents were not filed along with the written statement and, in fact, until the last day of the cross- examination of PW-1, who was cross-examined on at least three dates, Question nos. 95 to 97, which have been relied upon by the learned counsel for the defendant, read as under:

"95. After Atit's passing away, were there conversation with Samakshi and her parents in which a draft "Memorandum of family settlement" was given to them for their consideration?

Ans. Yes.

96. Witnesses is confronted with the typed photocopy of the aforesaid memorandum of family settlement which is unsigned. (Objected to by the counsel for the plaintiff) the witness states that that he does not recall whether it is this document. (The document is not taken on record at this stage).

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 23/09/2024 at 21:22:24

97. I suggest to you that the family settlement document that you shared was extremely unfair to the rights of Samakshi and Samarveer.

Ans. Whatever suggestion were given by us from time to time was totally fair and justified without compromising with rights of Samakashi and Samaveer rather the demand from them was totally beyond my means and unjustified. Therefore in correct to say that we were unfair to their rights."

12. Even during the cross-examination, the witness was sought to be confronted only with a typed copy of the alleged Memorandum of Family Settlement, which was also unsigned.

13. In my view, therefore, allowing the defendant to now produce these additional documents would put the clock back, and result in restarting the trial. The same cannot be allowed.

14. Apart from alleging that the documents were not filed due to certain inadvertence, no other ground has been urged in the application. These documents were, admittedly, in the power and possession of the defendant, as is evident from the defendant's own statement that these documents have been filed by the defendant in other proceedings.

15. I, therefore, find no merit in the present application. The same is accordingly dismissed.

CS(OS) 264/2019 & I.A. 7248/2019, 10101/2020, 9361/2021, 247/2024 & 1445/2024

16. The learned Local Commissioner appointed by this Court, vide Order dated 02.02.2024, shall continue to record the evidence of the defendant on the same terms and conditions as stipulated by this Court 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 23/09/2024 at 21:22:24 in its Order dated 02.02.2024. The learned counsel for the parties shall approach the learned Local Commissioner for fixing the dates for the recording of further evidence of the parties.

17. List before the learned Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 9th January 2025.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J SEPTEMBER 18, 2024/rv/DG Click here to check corrigendum, if any 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 23/09/2024 at 21:22:24