Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.59 seconds)
Documents citing Dadabuddappa Gouli vs Kalu Kanu Gouli And Another on 5 January, 2000

K.Suja vs The Inspector Of Police on 16 March, 2017

Where a party calling a witness and examining him discovers that he is either hostile or unwilling to answer questions put to him, he can obtain permission of the Court to put questions to him which may be put to him by way of cross-examination. The section does not say that a person who calls a witness may cross-examine him in certain circumstances, but he might put questions to him which might be put in cross-examination by the adverse party. That is not the same as cross-examination. This principle is laid down in Bikram Ali Pramanik v. Emperor, ILR (1929) 57 Cal 801; Luchi Ram Motilal Boid v. Radha Charan Poddar, ILR (1921) 49 Cal 93 ; Khijiruddin Sonar v. Emperor, ILR (1925) 53 Cal 372 ; Dadabuddappa Gouli v. Kalu Kanu Gouli, AIR 2000 Kant 158 (paras 5-8 and 14).''
Madras High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - T Mathivanan - Full Document

Satinderjit Singh vs Hardev Singh & Ors on 29 July, 2011

In this view of the matter, the petitioner cannot derive any benefit from the cases relied upon by his counsel viz., Srikanta Mondal Vs. Srikanta Mondal & Ors. 2003(2) ICC 957, State Vs. Ramesh Chand & Ors. 1974(I) ILR(Delhi) 129, Dadabuddappa Gouli Vs. Kale Kanu Gouli & Ors. 2000(2) LJR 302, Rehana Begum Vs. Mirza M. Shaiulla Baig(D) by LRs 2006(1) RCR(Criminal) 72 and Tanala Satyanarayana Vs. Tanali Ramarao & Ors. & Ors. 2006(4) RCR(Civil) 565.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Karaj Singh vs Amarjit Kaur And Others on 28 February, 2013

It may further be observed that the distinction must be drawn between the true witness and the hostile witness. A mere fact that the witness has given some unfavourable evidence is not enough to declare him as a witness "adverse". The sole test to declare the witness "adverse" is that the court should find out some material from the statement that he conceals the real sentiments and poses a hostile attitude, giving unfabourable evidence and making statement contrary to the facts known to him and if the court reaches the satisfaction that the conduct of the witness is such, could exercise the discretion that too a judicious discretion in terms of the judgment delivered in case Dadabuddappa Gouli vs. Kale Kanu Gouli & Ors. 2000 AIR (Karnataka) 158, should declare him hostile.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - A N Jindal - Full Document
1