We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Offer to compensate the defendant with costs (how much depends on a judge-to-judge basis—sneak into their previous cause lists and you will know how much this specific judge is imposing in other matters). You can also ask the Ahlmad, LC, or Reader of the court to find out how much cost this judge usually imposes. Whether the defendant's evidence is at the tendering stage or the cross-examination stage determines the cost that would most likely be imposed on you.
Other than this, there is a plethora of Delhi High Court (DHC) judgments that have allowed plaintiffs to participate even at a later stage. Look for the principle that 'procedural defects shall not cease a litigant's statutory rights.'