Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: PC 12/24
TARUN TULI Vs. STATE
03.07.2026
Present: Sh. Pawan Kumar Sharma, Ld. counsel for petitioner.
Sh. Harshit Vashisht & Sh. Shivdeep Kumar Tripathi, Ld.
counsels for R-3.
R-1 and R-5 are ex-parte.
None for R-2 and R-4.
IA no. 1/26
1. Vide the present application, R-3 wants to recall PW-2/Kartar Singh
Yadav for further cross-examination. It is the submission of R-3 that
on 22.08.2022, R-3 got hold of an FSL report dated 28.10.2019 and
qua the said FSL report now R-3 wants to cross-examine PW-2.
2. It is the submission of counsel for R-3 that PW-2/Kartar Singh is one
of the attesting witnesses to the Will in question and since the FSL
report contradicts the testimony of PW-2/Kartar Singh, therefore, he
should be allowed to cross-examine the said witness.
3. The application is opposed by the counsel for petitioner.
4. Firstly, it is submitted that the witness PW-2/Kartar Singh was cross-
examined way back in March, 2021 at the age of 80 years. It is
claimed that today the witness is aged over 85 years and he suffers
from various age related ailments and is unable to speak properly. It
is claimed that if the said witness is recalled, it would only mean that
R-3 wants to take benefit of the age of the witness to somehow create
some doubt in the mind of the court.
5.
Secondly, it is submitted that if the FSL report dated 28.10.2019
came in the possession of R-3 in 2022 itself, why the application has
-- 1 of 3 --
been moved only in August, 2024. Counsel argues that this should be
seen in light of the fact that the witness sought to be recalled is of
advanced age and essentially R-3 was waiting for the age of the
witness to lead him to a situation where he is unable to depose. Thus,
petitioner prays for dismissal of the application.
6. Perusal of file shows that the FSL report sought to be put to the
witness today is not part of the record. Witness PW-2/Kartar Singh is
not the author of the said report. Thus, if any FSL report (which is
not even part of record) has been given which favours R-3, the same
should first be brought on record and only then could an application
for recalling of the witness could be moved.
7. Even otherwise, if the said document was even part of record, it is
for R-3 to prove the same by summoning the concerned FSL expert.
Since PW-2/Kartar Singh is not the author of the said report, it is
difficult to say as to what question can be asked from Kartar Singh
on the basis of FSL report. When a court query in this regard was put
to counsel for R-3, he submitted that he cannot disclose his defence
to the court in this regard. It is very surprising that counsel for R-3 is
unwilling to lay before the court any ground which may give a
reason to the court to recall PW-2/Kartar Singh who admittedly is
aged about 85 years.
8. Even otherwise, as per record, PW-2/Kartar Singh was cross-
examined extensively on 24.03.2021 and no ground, except on the
premise of FSL report is laid or brought to my notice from the
application to justify summoning of Kartar Singh at this stage. It
appears that the summoning application is essentially a ploy to delay
adjudication in the matter.
-- 2 of 3 --
9. Under Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC, a witness cannot be recalled at the
mere asking of a party. In my humble opinion, R-3 is unable to
demonstrate before this court any ground which may justify
summoning of PW-2/Kartar Singh at this stage. In such
circumstances, the application is misconceived. It is dismissed.
PC 12/24
10.PW-4/Tarun Tuli is present in court. Request for adjournment is
made on behalf of R-3 on the ground that he is seriously ill and is
slated to undergo some medical procedure tomorrow. Counsel for
R-3 submits that he would like to seek instructions from his client
before cross-examining PW-4 who is the main witness and
propounder of the Will in question.
11.The request is strongly opposed by the counsel for petitioner who
claims that R-3 is unnecessarily delaying the matter.
12.Perusal of record shows that after the evidence of PW-4 was filed,
some time elapsed due to pendency of transfer petition due to lack of
jurisdiction of the court trying the matter earlier. Thus, considering
the request of counsel for R-3, I am inclined to adjourn the matter.
13.Date of 04.07.2026 stands cancelled.
14.List on 11.09.2026.
AASHISH GUPTA
DJ-01/NE/KKD/DELHI
03.07.2026
-- 3 of 3 --