Delhi District Court
Balasaraswathy vs . K.V.S.N. Raju on 19 November, 2015
1
C.S. No. 188/14
Balasaraswathy vs. K.V.S.N. Raju
19.11.2015
Present: Plaintiff in person.
Sh. Anoop Prakash, Counsel for defendant.
1.Arguments addressed at length on eight pending applications.
2. First application is U/o 14 Rule 5 CPC moved on behalf of plaintiff whereby modification has been sought for issue No. 1 by merely submitting that some of the documents have been admitted by the defendant, therefore, issue number 1 is required to be reframed in different format. Having gone through the same, since the issues have been framed based upon the pleadings and objection of the defendant, no reframing of issue number 1 as sought is required. Accordingly, application U/o 14 Rule 5 CPC stands dismissed.
3. Next application U/s 151 CPC has been moved on behalf of defendant for sending some of the documents to CFSL claiming the documents to be forged and fabricated. It is submitted by the plaintiff that most of the documents are admitted documents and defendant cannot seek indulgence of the Court for sending the admitted documents to CFSL. Per contra, Counsel for defendant has claimed the documents as forged and fabricated. Be that as it may, the Court is not to collect the evidence for considering the comparison of writing or signatures and if defendant wishes to conduct the same, he may 2 avail the said opportunity at his own expenses and efforts. Application U/s 151 CPC is accordingly dismissed.
4. Third application U/s 151 CPC has been moved on behalf of defendant seeking summoning of one Sunil Kumar in defendant's evidence. As previously noted, no list of witnesses on behalf of defendant was ever filed, therefore, opportunity to summon the other witnesses was declined. However, another application U/o 11 Rule 14 CPC moved on behalf of plaintiff is pending consideration, by which, directions are sought from the Court for defendant to place on record the reply issued by bank to legal notice of the defendant. Counsel for defendant submits that he will produce the said document on record and at the same time, plaintiff also submits that she also has no objection if examination of this witness before this Court in DE is allowed. By way of the application U/o 11 Rule 14 CPC, applicant also seeks directions to defendant to place on record his Pass Book for which also Counsel for defendant submits that he has no objection. Accordingly, both the applications stand allowed. Sunil Kumar be summoned on deposit of diet money by defendant.
5. Two applications U/o 11 Rule 14 CPC and U/o 11 Rule 1 CPC have been moved on behalf of defendant. By way of these applications, directions have been sought for plaintiff to produce on record her original Pass Book of SBI as well as to answer certain interrogatories. It may be noted that crossexamination of plaintiff has already been conducted by Counsel for defendant and it was open for 3 Counsel for defendant to put up all these questions during the course of crossexamination of plaintiff. To cover up the lacunas if any in crossexamination of plaintiff, the applications cannot be allowed. Accordingly, aforesaid applications stand dismissed.
6. Today another application U/o 16 Rule 2 CPC has been moved on behalf of defendant for taking on record the list of defendant witnesses. Plaintiff does not wish to file reply and has straightway addressed arguments on the same. Though the list of witnesses was not placed in time and now the defendant by way of this application seeks permission to examine seven more witnesses besides the defendant as well as one Sunil Kumar for whom the permission has already been granted. Plaintiff has objected to examination of these witnesses by submitting that their examination has no relevance to the facts of the case as well as is beyond pleadings and also the plaintiff was never informed of the facts which defendant now wants to prove by examination of these witnesses. Counsel for the defendant has alleged that plaintiff has cheated many people and has applied this modusoperandi in the instant matter as well which allegation is part of the pleadings. I have perused the list of witnesses and the purpose for which they are to examined before the Court. Most of them as stated would be examined merely for filing of the copies of the complaints or FIR(s) / cases etc. which purpose can be served by filing certified copies of those proceedings / complaints etc. and examination of all these witnesses for this simple fact is not required 4 before the Court. However, on the submission of Counsel for defendant two of the witnesses from the list are permitted to be examined before the Court, allegedly to explain conduct of plaintiff. For rest, certified copies of proceedings/complaints are permitted to be filed on record. Application stands disposed off in above terms.
7. To come up for DE on 09.02.2016.
(SAVITA RAO) ADJ01(W)/19.11.2015