HDFC LTD Vs. ANUKARAN MALIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This hearing has been done through video conferencing.

(2.) The present petition challenges two impugned orders dtd. 10/4/2019 and 2/7/2019 passed by the Trial Court in CS No.55486/16 titled Anukaran Malik v. Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd.

(3.) The background of this matter, is that the Respondent/Plaintiff (hereinafter "Plaintiff") filed a suit for recovery against the Petitioner/Defendant (hereinafter "Defendant") in 2013, seeking recovery of a sum of Rs.16,80,000.00 along with interest. The said suit was at the stage of trial and the Defendant, which is an NBFC, sought to lead evidence of a witness, i.e., DW-2-Ms. Geetika Vaish. Though her evidence by way of an affidavit was filed, DW-2 was not present before the Trial Court for tendering of the affidavit and for cross examination. An adjournment was sought on the ground that she had to urgently leave for Mumbai due to official work. This adjournment was refused and the evidence of the Defendant was closed vide order dtd. 10/4/2019. An application was thereafter preferred by the Defendant under Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC, seeking reopening of evidence of DW-2 and recall of the said order dtd. 10/4/2019, which was also rejected. In effect therefore, the evidence of the Defendant stood closed. Hence this petition.