Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Hema Agrawal vs Smt.Sarla Mahendra on 23 November, 2015

                                 1

Hema Agrawal Vs. Smt. Sarla Mahendra & Ors.
                                               W.P. No. 3074/2009

23.11.2015
      Shri Shashank Indapurkar, Advocate for the petitioner.
      Shri Sanjeev Jain, Advocate for the respondent No.1.

With the consent of parties, the matter is heard finally.

2. In this petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the validity of order dated 09/07/2009, by which, right of cross examination of the witness-respondent No. 1 has been closed.

3. When the matter was taken up, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be granted liberty to file an application under Order 26 Rule 4 of CPC before the trial court and the trial court may be directed to decide the same without being influenced by the order dated 09/07/2009.

4. The aforesaid prayer is not opposed by learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.

5. In view of aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the age of witness which is stated to be 80 years who is to be cross examined, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with direction that in 2 Hema Agrawal Vs. Smt. Sarla Mahendra & Ors. W.P. No. 3074/2009 case an application under Order 26 Rule 4 of CPC is preferred for cross examination of the witness, the trial court shall decide the said application in accordance with law by speaking order without being influenced by order dated 09/07/2009.

6. Let a copy of this order be sent to the trial court by fax.

Certified copy as per rules.

(Alok Aradhe) Judge Durgekar*