Back
SHAILESH P. BRAHME
Shankar Bhimrao – Appellant
Versus
Shivaji Kamaji – Respondent
JUDGMENT/ORDER
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard both the sides finally at the admission stage.
2. The petitioners are original defendants who are assailing the order dtd. 30/7/2021 passed below Exhibit-111 in Regular Civil Suit No.329/2012 by the learned Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nanded, thereby permitting the respondents/plaintiffs to examine a witness namely Mr. Laxman Mohan Mahabale.
3. RCS No.329/2012 is filed by the respondents for possession and damages. It is contended by them that the document purchase deed rewritten on 11/9/1999 is forged and bogus. The claim of the respondents is contested by the petitioners.
4. Oral evidence was led by the respondents and evidence closure pursis was submitted. Thereafter the petitioners led their evidence and filed pursis. The matter was posted for arguments. At that stage, the respondents submitted application (Exhibit-111) for leading additional oral evidence. The application is contested by the petitioners. By the impugned order, it stands allowed holding that in order to decide controversy between the parties and to have fair opportunity, the application deserves to be allowed.
5. The learned Counsel for the
Civil courts have the inherent authority to permit the introduction of additional evidence at any stage of the proceedings if a party demonstrates that such evidence could not be produced earlier des....
Order 18 Rule 17 CPC enables Court to recall any witness to clarify any doubts which it may have with regard to evidence led by parties.
Order XVIII Rule 3A CPC mandates initial party testimony but permits later examination for recorded reasons even if sought subsequently, exercised judicially in peculiar facts to balance justice and ....
Trial court's discretionary recall of witnesses under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC upheld for procedural fairness despite delay, subject to costs.
Point of Law : Negligence and failure to produce such evidence because of inadvertence/negligence, is not a lawful ground to permit a party to lead the additional evidence within the ambit and scope ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
