Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Reema Salkan – Appellant
Versus
Sumer Singh Salkan – Respondent
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant seeking setting aside of orders dated 04.08.2022, 20.12.2022 and 11.01.2023 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, North, Rohini, Delhi, in HMA Case No.1490/2018 titled as "Sumer Singh Salkan Vs. Reema Salkan", and to restore her right to cross-examine respondent/PW-1 without conditional cost of Rs.10,000/- in view of order dated 10.01.2022 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Miscellaneous Application No.21/2022 in Miscellaneous Application No.665/2021 in suo moto Writ Petition (C) No.3/2020 titled in Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation.
2. Notice issued.
3. Mr. Anindya Malhotra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent accepts notice.
4. The appellant (respondent before the Trial Court) has averred that vide first impugned order dated 04.08.2022, learned Family Court restored her right to continue cross-examination of the respondent (petitioner/PW-1) subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- by compensating the respondent therein on account of delay of 18 months in filing restoration application for cross-examination on 11.11.2021. The appellant's right to cross-examine respondent's (p
The main legal point established is that the right to cross-examine should be balanced with the circumstances of the party's absence and the prevailing legal framework, such as Covid-19 guidelines, t....
Cross examination of witness – Cross-examination of witness is meant to be opportunity to concerned party to rebut evidence given by witness – Same ought to be concluded within reasonable time limit ....
The court emphasizes the need for time limits in proceedings and holds that cross-examination in matrimonial matters cannot continue endlessly.
The court highlighted the need for a delicate balance between expeditious disposal and fair opportunity in matrimonial disputes, considering the reasons for delay and the impact of external factors.
Balancing the petitioner's right to cross-examine with the delay caused and compensating the respondent.
The court affirmed the essential right to cross-examine witnesses fully, emphasizing no counsel should be compelled to conclude cross-examination in one sitting without justified reasons.
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
