High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 02 DEL CK 1729

Shri Gian Chand Ralhan vs Shri Gurvinder Singh Bakshi

Delhi High Court · Decided on 17 February 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 238 Of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 380 words

Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J

1.

This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode.

CM(M) 238/2026 & CM APPL. 6415/2026

2.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, assailing the order dated 14th November, 2025, passed by the learned Trial Court in CS DJ No. 357/2020, whereby the question put by the petitioner/defendant to the PW1 (respondent) in his cross-examination, regarding receiving of the notice marked as PW1/DX1 has been declined.

3.

Heard. Record perused.

4.

The  relevant  portion  of  the  cross-examination  of  PW1  dated  14th November, 2025 reads as follows:

“At this stage, ld. counsel for the defendant has shown the copy of the purported notice under Order XII rule 8 CPC dated 11.11.2025 given by the defendant to the plaintiff, to the witness and has asked the witness as to whether the said notice was received by him. For identification sake, the said notice is marked as Mark PWl/DXl.

(Court observation:- the question is declined as order XII rule 8 forms part of chapter 12 of CPC on admissions and is prior to chapter 14 pertaining to settlement of issues etc. Hence the said purported notice dated 11.11.2025 being issued after framing of issues cannot be put to the witness in evidence)”

5.

This Court has also perused the alleged notice placed on record by the petitioner, and the said notice was said to be sent to the respondent through speed post. Keeping in view these circumstances, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent, if the petitioner is allowed to put a question to him during cross-examination as to whether the said notice has been received by him.

6.

Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is permitted to put only the aforesaid question regarding receipt of the said notice to PW-1. In this respect, let PW-1 be examined on the date already fixed in the matter by the trial court or on any other date as may be convenient to the trial Court.

7.

In view of thereof, the petition is disposed of in the above terms. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

8.

Copy of this order be given Dasti, under the signatures of Court Master.