Back
BISWAROOP CHOWDHURY
Kamal Paul – Appellant
Versus
Bijoy Paul – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Biswaroop Chowdhury, J.
1. The petitioner before this Court is a defendant in a suit for partition and is aggrieved by the Order dated 21/09/2022 and 14/11/2022 passed by Learned Judge Small Causes Court Sealdah. in Title Suit No. 42 of 2017.
2. The case of the petitioner may be summed up thus:
2. The petitioner/defendant no.2 entered appearance in the suit by filing a written statement. The issues to the suit were framed and the plaintiff concluded his examination in chief and cross examination.
3. The Learned Trial Court fixed a date for Defendant's Witness on 01.08.2022 and the Petitioner/defendant no. 2 was not able to appear before the said Court for his evidence on the said date and thereafter another date was fixed on 22-08-2022. Again the date was fixed on 19.09.2022 when due to resolution of local bar function of the Court could not be held and thereafter 21-09-2022, was fixed for evidence of the Defendant's Witness.
4. On 21-09-2022 the petitioner/defendant no. 2 filed an application with medical report praying for appointment of an a
The court has discretion to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to take evidence from a defendant unable to attend court due to health reasons, emphasizing the protection of fundamental rights.
The court affirmed the necessity to consider a defendant's health and age in granting commissions for evidence gathering, reinforcing the right to a fair trial.
The court upheld the trial Court's discretion to appoint an advocate commissioner for recording evidence when a witness is unable to attend due to medical conditions, emphasizing justice over procedu....
The court clarified that the inability to attend court due to health issues must be addressed with sensitivity, and updated medical evidence is critical for justifying the appointment of a commission....
The court clarified that the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner and summoning witnesses are at the court's discretion, not a right of the parties, and the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff....
The court emphasized that the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner and summoning witnesses are at the court's discretion, and the burden of proof rests with the plaintiff.
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
