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

2012 Supreme(Bom) 1524

S.S.SHINDE
Purushottam – Appellant
Versus
Gajanan – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:R.R. Mantri, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1, B.B. KUlkarni, Advocate.

Judgment :

1. This petition takes exception of the order dated 7.7.2011, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Chopda, thereby allowing application Exh.154 filed under Order XIII Rule 3(1)(a) of C.P.C., in R.C.S. No.167 of 2000.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard finally.

3. The background facts, leading to file this petition, as disclosed in the petition, are as under:-

The respondent No.1 herein has filed a suit for partition against the petitioner and other respondents herein. The petitioner appeared in the said suit and while he was under cross examination, the respondent No.1 sought to produce documents contending that it were reserved for cross examination of the petitioner. The petitioner had objected to produce the documents for the first in cross, however, the said application was rejected on 25.10.1996. The petitioner had challenged the said order in this Court by filing writ petition No. 869 of 1997 and the said writ petition came to be allowed by this Court holding that no document can be reserved for cross examination of a party.

The respondent No.1, by way of Exh.94 on 13.11.1998, tried to introduce very same documents contending th















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