SACHIN TANEJA & ORS Vs. YATINDERJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the present petition, the petitioner seeks to impugn the order dated 15.3.2016 by which an application filed by the petitioner/defendant under Order XVI Rule 1 read with Section 148 and 151 CPC and Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay/extending the time for filing the list of witnesses and praying that the list of witnesses submitted on 19.10.2015 be taken on record.

(2.) The present suit has been filed for perpetual injunction and declaration under the Specific Relief Act by the respondent/plaintiff seeking a decree of perpetual injunction to restrain the petitioner/defendant from entering into the suit property as shown in red in the site plan i.e. 1/4th undivided share of the plaintiff in property No.3, Hanuman Road, Connaught Place, New Delhi or from taking possession of the suit property, etc. A decree of declaration is also sought for declaring that the plaintiff is the rightful owner and in possession of the suit property. Other connected reliefs are also sought.

(3.) On 3.11.2011, when the matter was pending before this court, this court framed issues and directed that affidavit by way of evidence be filed by both the parties within four weeks along with list of witnesses. With the consent of the parties, Sh. K.S. Khurana, former Additional District and Sessions Judge, Delhi was appointed as local commissioner to record the evidence of the parties. On 8.2.2012, on an application moved by the respondent under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC, issue No.4 was recast. On the same date, an order was passed directing the parties to file their respective evidence by way of affidavit. The order was that the plaintiff shall, at the first instance, file his entire evidence before the next date. The petitioner/defendant was to file evidence by way of affidavit within two weeks from the next date fixed before the local commissioner.