Karma Pardhan vs New India Assurance Company

Dev Darshan Sud, J.—The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the order of the learned Court below closing his evidence. The case was remanded to the learned trial Court by order of this Court dated 26th May, 2011 in RSA No. 368 of 2001. What I find from the order challenged is that the plaintiff/petitioner has been granted number of opportunities to lead evidence and that the learned Court below closed the evidence of the petitioner when one witness from the General Insurance Corporation was served but not present. Learned trial Court below notes that Court had granted sufficient and ample opportunities to the petitioner to lead evidence. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it would not be appropriate to grant additional opportunity to the petitioner and to keep the case pending indefinitely.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The general proposition is that number of opportunities availed cannot be the subject matter for adjudication, that is to say no party can claim a vested right in claiming a particular number of opportunities to lead evidence. However, in the present case the witness summoned by the petitioner is not attending Court despite service and it would be open to the learned Court below to use coercive methods to procure his presence in Court. This petition is accordingly allowed. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Court below on 30.3.2012.

All the pending applications also stands disposed of.