V. K. Sharma

The Plaintiff brought a motion seeking leave to file additional evidence, including an expert handwriting report, in the context of a summary judgment motion brought by the Defendant Sandhu.

The court reviewed the procedural history, noting previous orders setting strict timelines for filing expert reports and additional materials.

Applying the factors for granting leave under Rule 39.02(2), the court found the evidence relevant and responsive to cross-examination, but determined that granting leave would result in non-compensable prejudice to the Defendant and would conflict with earlier court orders.

The Plaintiff's explanation for the delay in retaining the expert and bringing the motion for leave was deemed unsatisfactory, as the need for such evidence was known much earlier.

Consequently, the Plaintiff's motion for leave was dismissed.

This decision addresses multiple motions in a long-standing family law enforcement action.

The court granted Khatija Khatri's application to vacate a Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) and other instruments from title to Bellwood Farm, finding the CPL had no legal basis after a prior order was set aside and the underlying application dismissed.

The court also granted Mohammad Munir Subhani and Khatija Khatri's motion to dismiss the action against them for inordinate and inexcusable delay, citing prejudice due to fading memories and health issues of key witnesses.

Talat Khan's motion for a new CPL was dismissed due to the dismissal of the action against those defendants and her own delay.

However, Talat Khan's motion for the reinstatement of a Writ of Seizure and Sale (No. 98-0259) was granted, as it was a support enforcement writ under the Family Law Rules and thus did not expire, and its removal was improper.