AJAY KAUSHAL(Not Applicable) MUNISH DATWALIA vs MS RAJPURA HYDRO POWER PRIVATE LIMITED(Not Applicable) — OMP/1189/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O10 R2. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 06th May 2026.
CNR: HPHC010491232025
Filing Number
OMP/41529/2025
Filing Date
12-Aug-2025
Registration No
OMP/1189/2025
Registration Date
22-Aug-2025
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Civil Section
Decision Date
06-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Last updated 02-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.AJAY KAUSHAL(Not Applicable) MUNISH DATWALIA
Respondent(s)
-
1.MS RAJPURA HYDRO POWER PRIVATE LIMITED(Not Applicable)
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil KukrejaView PDF
The High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed Ajay Kaushal's application seeking to summon MS Rajanya Infrastructure Private Limited's director for oral examination regarding unpaid construction work dues. The court held that Order 10, Rule 2 CPC is limited to clarifying matters in dispute before trial and cannot be used to take evidence, secure admissions, or supersede regular trial procedures. Since pleadings were complete and the application aimed at obtaining payment records prematurely, the court found it inappropriate and dismissed it without merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
12-Mar-2026
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja
-
24-Feb-2026
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja
-
24-Dec-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil KukrejaView PDF
-
24-Dec-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya
-
03-Dec-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satyen VaidyaView PDF
-
03-Dec-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Aug-2025
Case filed
Registration No. OMP/1189/2025
The High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismissed Ajay Kaushal's application seeking to summon MS Rajanya Infrastructure Private Limited's director for oral examination regarding unpaid construction work dues. The court held that Order 10, Rule 2 CPC is limited to clarifying matters in dispute before trial and cannot be used to take evidence, secure admissions, or supersede regular trial procedures. Since pleadings were complete and the application aimed at obtaining payment records prematurely, the court found it inappropriate and dismissed it without merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts