Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.21 seconds)
Documents citing Santosh Aggarwal vs Pardeep Kumar And Others on 8 April, 2010

C. Lal Gupta vs Sujoy Gupta on 21 December, 2013

8. Judgment of Santosh Aggarwal (Supra) filed by defendant is not applicable in facts and circumstances of present case. It is not case of defendant that copies of complaint/evidence certified copies of which have been filed by him alongwith present application were not in knowledge and possession of defendant prior to date of filing of present application. Defendant is himself accused in both the complaints referred to by him in his application. Certified copy of affidavit of plaintiff in CC No. 468/01 as filed by defendant with present application shows that affidavit has been attested on 16.10.2010 and certified copy has been obtained by defendant on 03.03.2012. Certified copy of complaint under Section 138 NI Act as filed by defendant with present application in CC No. 4605/04 shows that complaint is CS No. 58/11 Page No. 4 of 6 dated 21.09.2010. It is not case of defendant that he appeared in both the above mentioned criminal complaints just before 28.09.2013 i.e. date of filing of present application.
Delhi District Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Gurdeep Singh vs Nahar Singh And Others on 19 March, 2014

"This court is of the view that as per Order 8 Rule 1-A, sub clause (3) CPC, the document could be filed by the defendant at a later stage but only with the leave of the Court. Learned counsel for the defendant has placed reliance on judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana titled "Santosh Aggarwal Vs. Pardeep Kumar and others, 2010 (4) PLR 594", wherein it has been observed that if the documentary evidence not filed with the pleadings the same can be filed at a subsequent stage with the leave of the court. Thus, relying upon the said judgment and the legal provisions involved, the application moved by the plaintiff is dismissed and the other moved by defendants is allowed. The defendant No.1 is burdened with costs of Rs.500/- to be paid to the plaintiff. The defendant No.1 is allowed to prove the original writing dated 27.12.1987. However, it is made clear that only one opportunity is given to the defendant No.1 to prove the said document. Now case is adjourned to 25.2.2014 for payment of costs and for proving original writing dated 27.12.1987."
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - M S Sullar - Full Document
1