Delhi District Court
Union Of India vs Sh. Paramjeet Singh & Anr. on 20 May, 2008
:: 3 ::
IN THE COURT OF SHRI YASHWANT KUMAR :
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE (LAC) : DELHI
LAC No. 130/2/06
Union of India Versus Sh. Paramjeet Singh & Anr.
ORDER
1 By this order, I shall dispose of an application U/Sec.151 CPC filed by the counsel for IP no.2 for recording the cross examination of IP no.2 on commission.
2 The IP no.2 has filed the aforesaid application stating the facts that this reference is fixed for evidence/cross examination of IP no.2. However, IP no.2 is completely frigid and not in a position to appear in the court for her cross examination as per the other reasons mentioned in the application. Request made to appoint the Commissioner at the cost of IP no.1 for recording of cross examination of IP no.2 at her residence.
3 Reply filed by IP no.1 stating the facts that the application is vague and without any merits. No medical certificate in support of the averments made in the application has been filed. By the appointment of Local :: 3 ::
Commissioner, IP no.1 apprehends that recording of statement of IP no.2 at her residence will create trouble and ugly seen at that time as some persons having malafide intentions are likely to be present there because on earlier dates of hearing, the IP no.2 had abused the IP no.1 and used filthy language outside the court room and humiliated the IP no.1. It is further stated that the IP no.1 is always ready and willing to bear the expenses for coming up the IP no.2 before this court for her cross examination.
4 I have heard the Ld. Counsel for the parties and have perused the materials on record.
5 Perusal of the record reveals that this reference under Section 30-31 of the LA Act is at the stage of cross examination of IP no.2 and the IP no.2 is not in a position to appear before the court for her cross examination due to her inability and ill-health to move, therefore, appointment of Local Commissioner has been sought for cross examination of IP no.2 at her residence and the cost & expenses, IP no.1. Whereas the IP no.1 has opposed this application and agreed to bear the expenses of IP no.2 for her coming to the court for her cross examination on the date of hearing. During arguments, it has been agreed that IP no.2 shall bear the fee of Local Commissioner for recording of evidence at the residence of IP no.2.
:: 3 ::
6 In view of the above facts and circumstances, the application filed by IP no.2 is partly allowed with the direction that Sh.Naresh Mann, Advocate Chamber no.91 Civil Wing, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi is appointed as Local Commissioner for recording of the evidence of IP no.2 at her residence at the expenses of IP no.2. Fee of Local Commissioner is fixed at Rs.2,200/- which shall be paid by IP no.2 prior to the recording of the evidence. The Local Commissioner shall issue notices to the IPs for fixing the date of recording of evidence prior to his visit as per the convenient time & date of both the parties and thereafter, shall file the evidence recorded on or before the next date. Copy of this order be also given to the Advocate who has been appointed as Local Commissioner.
Now to come up for IPs evidence on 12.08.2008.
Announced in open court ( YASHWANT KUMAR ) 20.05.2008 ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE (LAC) DELHI :: 3 ::
LAC No. 130/2/06 20.05.2008 Present - None Vide separate order dictated and announced in the open court, an application U/Sec.151 for recording the cross examination of IP no.2 on commission is disposed of accordingly.
Now, to come up for IPs evidence on 12.08.2008.
( YASHWANT KUMAR ) ADJ/LAC/DELHI/20.05.2008