The cross examination is a tool to establish the reliability of a witness and to ascertain the credibility of the case put forward before the Court. The court should elicit the answer of the witness after noting the objections, and the final decision to reject particular evidence as irrelevant or inadmissible can be taken at the end of the trial.

Heard Shri S. D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Shri Sudin Usgaonkar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for ther Respondents.

2. Rule. Heard forthwith. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents, waive service.

3. The above Petition takes exception to the Orders passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Panaji, whereby five questions put to Dw.1 in his cross examination, came to be disallowed on the ground that such question is irrelevant.

4. Shri S. D. Lotlikar, learned Senior Advocate, has submitted that the learned Judge has erroneously refused such questions as, according to him, the questions are very material for deciding the matter in controversy. Learned Senior Advocate further submits that the learned Judge was not justified to interrupt the cross on irrelevant ground and, as such, cause grave prejudice to the Petitioners. Learned Senior Advocate further submits that the cross examination is a strong weapon in the hands of the opposite party and, as such, it was not open to the learned Judge to call upon the Petitioners to justify the reason why the questions were being asked. Learned Senior Advocate further submits that the suit filed by the Petitioners is to declare a Will as null and void on the ground to coercion and unnatural nature of the Will and for other reasons stated in the plaint. Learned Senior Advocate further pointed out that it is well settled that in such cases, it is always open to the Plaintiff to draw some suspicion with regard to the execution of such Will and as such, it was not open to the learned Judge to disallow the questions put by the Petitioner. The learned Senior Advocate as such submits that the Orders passed by the learned Judge disallowing the questions be quashed and set aside.

5. On the other hand, Shri Sudin Usgaonkar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Respondents, has submitted that the questions which have been disallowed are irrelevant to decide the matter in controversy. Learned Senior Advocate has thereafter taken me through the issues framed in the suit to point out that the questions which have been asked were not at all material nor have any nexus with the issues raised in the suit. Learned Senior Advocate further pointed out that the questions which were asked were not part of the pleadings of the Petitioners nor of the Respondents and, as such, the questions cannot be put to the witness. Learned Senior Advocate has thereafter taken me through the provisions of Section 145 and 146 of the Evidence Act to pointed out the questions which can be put to a witness in cross examination and, as such, according to him, the questions which have been put to the Respondents do not come within the said provisions of the Evidence Act. Learned Senior Advocate as such submits that the question of interfering in the impugned Order would not arise at all and, consequently, the Petition be dismissed. In support of his submission, the learned Senior Advocate has relied upon the Judgment of this Court reported in 1979 Mh. L. J. 11 in the case of Baburao Patel vs. Bal Thackeray & anr. Learned Senior Advocate has pointed out that in the said Judgment, the law has been settled about the nature of the questions which could be put in the cross examination for examining the character of such witness.

6. I have given my thoughtful considerations to the learned Senior Advocates and with their assistance, I have also gone through the records. The cross examination of the witness is a weapon in the hands of the opposite party to establish the reliability or otherwise of a witness who is under cross examination. The witnesses are also cross examined to ascertain the credibility of such witness and also to see the veracity of the case put forward before the Court. Section 137 of the Evidence Act, inter alia, provides that the examination of a witness by the party who calls him shall be called his examination-in-chief, whereas the examinati