Commercial Courts Can Record Cross-Examination Of Outstation Witnesses Through Video Conferencing: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has said that commercial courts can permit recording of cross-examination of overseas or outstation witnesses, who cannot travel due to any reason, through video conferencing after following the prescribed procedure, if the reason is found to be genuine and bona fide.

“This would ensure that cross-examination of witnesses is not conducted in a never ending manner and such witnesses are not inconvenienced, especially, if they are to travel from foreign countries,” Justice Prathiba M Singh said.

The court observed that whenever there are outstation and overseas witnesses, the District Courts ought to ensure that such witnesses are not repeatedly called before court for cross-examination.

Justice Singh said that in commercial suits, the Commercial Courts would be fully empowered to pass directions restricting the time limit for the cross-examination in order to ensure that unreasonable inconvenience is not cause to such witnesses who may be required to travel repeatedly.

“Moreover, in the case of overseas/outstation witnesses if for any reason such witnesses cannot travel and the reason is found to be genuine and bona fide, recordal of cross-examination, after following the prescribed procedure can also be permitted through video conferencing,” the court said.

It directed the Registrar General of the High Court to circulate the order to all District Judges, Commercial court judges and in district courts in the national capital.

While dealing with two cross petitions filed by Inter Ikea Systems BV and Quess Corp Limited, Justice Singh said that unending filing of documents, producing a large number of witnesses, cross-examination over several hearings, unnecessary inconvenience being caused to witnesses especially coming from outstation or overseas etc. “has become a malaise.”

“These are the attempts that ought to be avoided by parties especially in commercial suits,” the court said.

It also took note of the issue of denial of public documents such as trademark registrations and records from the office of Registrar of Companies such as incorporation certificate, MoA and AoA of the Company and other similar public records.

“It is usual to note in such matters that parties tend to deny all documents belonging to the other party. In the opinion of the Court neither party should be allowed to make unreasonable blanket denials of documents which are publicly accessible such as trademark registration, records relating to Registrar of Companies, etc,” the court said.

It added: “There can be no doubt that if there is any ground as to genuinity or authenticity of the documents, the same can be denied. But en masse denial of such documents ought not to be permitted.”

Counsel for Plaintiff: Mr. Samar Bansal, Ms. Tanya Varma, Mr. Rohan Krishna Seth & Ms. Parkhi

Rai, Adv.

Counsel for Defendant: Mr. Sandeep Seth, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Manu Seshadri, Mr. Aveak Ganguly, Mr. Abhijit Lal, Mr. Anubhav Mishra & Mr. Sahil, Advs.

Title: INTER IKEA SYSTEMS BV v. QUESS CORP LIMITED

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1009

Click Here To Read Order