Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2 (0.19 seconds)Bahori S/O Kalloo vs Ghure S/O Balwant And Anr. on 24 April, 1959
It is noticeable that the latter part of the extract just cited above and the proviso were added at the same time and they make it very clear that the proviso is confined in its operation to the witnesses who are named by the parties to the dispute. It is only the witness of a party who cannot be examined unless his affidavit was put in earlier. This proviso in no way takes away the basic and fundamental right of a court to seek assistance from whatever source it pleases if it is necessary in the interest of justice to seek that assistance. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the Magistrate made no mistake when he examined Nawab Ghaznafar Ali Khan as he was a necessary witness. The view that I have expressed above is supported by a decision of the Rajasthan High Court reported in Bahori v. Ghure, AIR 1960 Raj 15.
1