Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.16 seconds)

Ravi vs Ramar on 11 October, 2007

7. Taking up the first argument on Order XVIII Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure, it no doubt states that a party to a suit must examine himself before he examines any other witnesses on his behalf. Originally this Court had taken a view that the provision under Order XVIII Rule 3A is mandatory. Subsequently, on reference, a Division Bench headed by Justice P.K.Mishra in clear and categorical terms held that it is only directory and not mandatory. See, Ravi and another vs. Ramar, (2007) 6 MLJ 1119(DB). Therefore, it is always open to the party to examine any other person other than himself or herself before examining himself or herself. It can always be obtained at a later stage.
Madras High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 19 - P K Misra - Full Document
1