{"id":204022,"date":"2018-10-21T18:33:37","date_gmt":"2018-10-21T13:03:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=204022"},"modified":"2018-10-23T17:44:02","modified_gmt":"2018-10-23T12:14:02","slug":"report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/","title":{"rendered":"Report filed under Order 7, Rule 14 of Civil Procedure Code, accepted as evidence; impugned order affirmed"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Himachal Pradesh High Court: <\/b>A Single Judge Bench comprising of Sureshwar Thakur, J., dismissed this petition where an application for production of document relied on by respondent was in question.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Facts of the case were that respondent, landlord of the petitioner had filed a petition seeking eviction of tenant\/petitioner on the ground that the property is bonafidely required by respondent for personal use. During the pendency of rent petition respondent filed an application under Order 7, Rule 14 (3) of the Civil Procedure Code where a report prepared by a Civil Engineer was produced. Petitioner had approached this court aggrieved by the order of Rent Controller where respondent\u2019s application as mentioned above was accepted. Petitioner contended that the documents submitted under the application was a report made after the institution of rent petition and was not existing before filing of the rent petition as it should have been under the provision.<span class=\"Apple-converted-space\">\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The High Court was of the view that the document submitted was an expert report which rather falls under Section 45 of the Evidence Act. The fact that there are no provisos under Order 7 Rule 14 barring opinion of an expert, the same can be permitted as an evidence even when it came into light subsequent, to, the institution of the petition. Therefore, the Court granted leave for tendering the report as evidence which is just and essential for the controversy in the rent petition and affirmed the impugned order. [Suman Bala v. Rakesh Sood,<a href=\"http:\/\/scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/6vMi20OU\"><b>2018 SCC OnLine HP 1462<\/b><\/a>, decided on 28-09-2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Sureshwar Thakur, J., dismissed this petition where an application for production of <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":222107,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2521,32156,2537],"class_list":["post-204022","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Evidence","tag-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code","tag-Report"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Report filed under Order 7, Rule 14 of Civil Procedure Code, accepted as evidence; impugned order affirmed | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Report filed under Order 7, Rule 14 of Civil Procedure Code, accepted as evidence; impugned order affirmed\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Sureshwar Thakur, J., dismissed this petition where an application for production of\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-10-21T13:03:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-23T12:14:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/\",\"name\":\"Report filed under Order 7, Rule 14 of Civil Procedure Code, accepted as evidence; impugned order affirmed | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-10-21T13:03:37+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-23T12:14:02+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Report filed under Order 7, Rule 14 of Civil Procedure Code, accepted as evidence; impugned order affirmed\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Report filed under Order 7, Rule 14 of Civil Procedure Code, accepted as evidence; impugned order affirmed | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Report filed under Order 7, Rule 14 of Civil Procedure Code, accepted as evidence; impugned order affirmed","og_description":"Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Sureshwar Thakur, J., dismissed this petition where an application for production of","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-10-21T13:03:37+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-23T12:14:02+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/","name":"Report filed under Order 7, Rule 14 of Civil Procedure Code, accepted as evidence; impugned order affirmed | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg","datePublished":"2018-10-21T13:03:37+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-23T12:14:02+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/21\/report-filed-under-order-7-rule-14-of-civil-procedure-code-accepted-as-evidence-impugned-order-affirmed\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Report filed under Order 7, Rule 14 of Civil Procedure Code, accepted as evidence; impugned order affirmed"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":202271,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/application-for-discovery-of-documents-under-order-xi-rule-12-of-cpc-filed-after-the-stage-of-settlement-of-issues-is-non-maintainable\/","url_meta":{"origin":204022,"position":0},"title":"Application for discovery of documents under Order XI Rule 12 of CPC filed after the stage of settlement of issues is non-maintainable","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 27, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Jharkhand High Court: A Single Judge bench comprising of Chandrashekhar, J. dismissed a civil writ petition filed against the order of trial court dismissing petitioner\u2019s application for discovery of documents. In the present case, the petitioner was the defendant in suit in trial court; where he had filed an application\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":309602,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/18\/hp-hc-parties-cannot-invoke-order-26-rule-9-of-cpc-and-call-upon-court-to-generate-evidence-for-them-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":204022,"position":1},"title":"Parties cannot invoke Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC and call upon Court to generate evidence for them: Himachal Pradesh High Court","author":"Editor","date":"December 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cWhen it is a matter of record that the petitioner had sought amendment in the suit on the ground that during the pendency of the suit, certain part of the suit land stood encroached by the respondent, this pre-supposes that the petitioner was aware of his boundaries.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"himachal pradesh high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/himachal-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/himachal-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/himachal-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/himachal-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":317658,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/delhi-high-court-upholds-trial-court-order-dismissing-order7-rule11-application-due-procedural-considerations-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":204022,"position":2},"title":"Issue of limitation cannot be decided without recording of evidence, once it becomes a mixed question of law and fact: Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court\u2019s dismissal of Order 7 Rule 11","author":"Arunima","date":"March 18, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court held that the dismissal of the petitioner's application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC was warranted, emphasizing the need to focus solely on the allegations in the plaint at the preliminary stage because the issues regarding limitation and adverse possession required further evidence and examination, which could\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":220917,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/16\/kar-hc-reasonable-time-to-pay-arrears-of-rent-ought-to-be-granted-to-tenant\/","url_meta":{"origin":204022,"position":3},"title":"Kar HC | Reasonable time to pay arrears of rent ought to be granted to tenant","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 16, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: S.G. Pandit, J. while disposing of this Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code set aside the order of the lower Court. In the instant case, the application of the petitioner filed under Order 17 Rule 1 and 2 CPC was rejected by\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":271106,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/03\/madhya-pradesh-high-court-review-of-an-order-passed-in-a-review-petition-under-order-xlvii-rule-9-held-not-maintainable-petition-dismissed\/","url_meta":{"origin":204022,"position":4},"title":"Madhya Pradesh High Court | Review of an order passed in a review petition under Order XLVII Rule 9 held not maintainable; Petition dismissed","author":"Editor","date":"August 3, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court: The Division Bench of Ravi Malimath, CJ. and Vishal Mishra, J. dismissed a second review petition holding that pursuant to the provision under Order XLVII Rule 9 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC), a review of an order passed in a review petition is not maintainable. A\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madhya Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":217682,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/03\/ph-hc-no-fresh-suit-can-be-filed-once-the-issues-have-been-framed-and-the-same-was-not-disputed-by-the-party\/","url_meta":{"origin":204022,"position":5},"title":"P&#038;H HC | No fresh suit can be filed once the issues have been framed and the same was not disputed by the party","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 3, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Punjab and Haryana High Court:\u00a0 Deepak Sibal, J. dismissed the present petition as the impugned order was not defective on the ground that framing of the issue was not challenged by the petitioner and evidence were led only on the same ground.\u00a0 A petition was filed against the dismissal order\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204022","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=204022"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204022\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/222107"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=204022"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=204022"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=204022"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}