Skip to content


Krishan Lal Gupta Vs. Dujodwala Industries and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtDelhi High Court
Decided On
Case NumberInterim Application No. 1622 of 1974 and Suit No. 356 of 1976 and Interim Application No. 2227 of 19
Judge
Reported inILR1976Delhi442
ActsDelhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 1967 - Rule 1
AppellantKrishan Lal Gupta;The Birla Cotton Spinning and Weavingmills Ltd.
RespondentDujodwala Industries and ors.;indequip Private Ltd. and anr.
Advocates: Janendra Lal,; S.C. Malik,; B.R. Sabharwal,;
Excerpt:
.....has been called to the important points involve in the case on which his rulings are sought from time to time. he is asked to decide on admissibility of documents and relevancy of evidence. he give his rulings there and then. nothing is reserved till the end except judgment. to judgment he proceeds immediately on the conclusion of arguments if he has made up his mind. if the case has been well prepared and well argued judgment is dictated in open court in the presence of the parties unless reserved for some reason.; further, that the trial cannot be broken into fragments. if you break the trial you break its essential unity, its thematic coherence. the judge has to see the facts of the case steadily and as a whole. he cannot see them into different bits. in a word he has to ge the..........evidence should be recorded continuously without any break, except in very exceptional circumstances such as the illness of a party, his witnesses or the advocate appearing in the case. there are too many adjournments on the ground of (a) non-attendance of witnesses, (b) want of time and (c) convenience of counsel. orderxvi rules 1 and 2 should be amended so as to provide that the list of witnesses to be summoned by any party should be filed within a specified time. the date of hearing should be fixed only after such a list is filled and having regard to the time that may be reasonably required for summoning the witnesses. the date of hearing should be fixed in consultation with the advocates of both sides. where a party has applied late for summoning the witnesses, the summons should be.....
Judgment:
ORDER

xviii Rule 1(2) proviso enacts that when the hearing of evidence has once begun, hearing of the suit shall be continued from day to day. In practice, this provision is rarely observed. The practice which prevails in England should be followed, i.e. the evidence should be recorded continuously without any break, except in very exceptional circumstances such as the illness of a party, his witnesses or the advocate appearing in the case. There are too many adjournments on the ground of (a) non-attendance of witnesses, (b) want of time and (c) convenience of counsel.

Orderxvi Rules 1 and 2 should be amended so as to provide that the list of witnesses to be summoned by any party should be filed within a specified time. The date of hearing should be fixed only after such a list is filled and having regard to the time that may be reasonably required for summoning the witnesses. The date of hearing should be fixed in consultation with the advocates of both sides. Where a party has applied late for summoning the witnesses, the summons should be issued at his risk. A provision should be made in the Code enabling the parties to serve their own witnesses. Penal action should be taken against the witnesses who fail to attend though duly served (Order Xvi Rules 10 to 13).'

(32) In its 54th report on the Code of Civil Procedure published in 1973 the Law Commission says :

'


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //