SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Kar) 555

NANJUNDA SETTY – Appellant
Versus
TALLAM SUBBARYA SETTY AND SONS – Respondent


( 1 ) PETITIONERS are the plaintiffs in O. S. No. 686/97 on the file of City Civil Judge, Court Hall No. 7, Bangalore. The plaintiffs filed the above suit for the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. The respondents herein are defendants in the said suit. They have contested the claim of the plaintiffs. Issues were framed. Plaintiffs. They have adduced evidence and closed their side. On behalf of the defendants, one witness was examined as DW-1. Thereafter, affidavit of second witness for the defendants has been filed by way of examination in chief. Along with the affidavit in the examination in chief, an application is filed under Section 151 of CPC requesting the court to permit the defendants to produce some documents which they wanted to mark in the course of evidence of DW-2. The said application was opposed by the plaintiffs. Learned trial Judge after considering the rival contentions has allowed the said application for production of documents. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioners have referred this writ petition.

( 2 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners contends, as is seen from the order the court explanation for the delay Belo























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top