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

1949 Supreme(Cal) 170

HARRIES, SANKER
SRIS CHANDRA NANDY – Appellant
Versus
ANNAPURNA RAY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Amarendra Narayan Bagchi, CHANDRA SEKHAR SEN, LALA HEMANTA KUMAR, SITARAM BANERJEE

HARRIES, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition for revision of an order of a learned Subordinate Judge of Murshidabad directing that the evidence of the plaintiff's husband be taken on commission.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff who is a lady had already given evidence on commission in the suit and it is suggested that her husband was her legal adviser and a most important witness in the case. The defence were naturally anxious to cross examine this witness in open Court. But an application was made for the issue of a commission on the ground that the witness was unfit to give evidence.

( 3 ) AN affidavit of the plaintiff was filed in support of the application and a medical certificate of some medical practitioner was also tendered.

( 4 ) THERE can be no doubt that the learned Judge in coming to the conclusion that a commission should issue was influenced by this medical certificate. In his order he states :"heard the learned lawyers of both parties and perused the petition of the plaintiff of date supported by a medical certificate. Plaintiff's prayers for examination of her ailing husband on commission will be allowed. "

( 5 ) MR. Banerji on behalf of the petitioner has contended that this med


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