Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Kenya Airways – Appellant
Versus
Basant India Inc. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. process and timeline for cross-examinations (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. court's reasoning behind rejecting application (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. previous adjournments affect current consideration (Para 7) |
| 4. opportunity granted for cross-examination clarified (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT
CM(M) 271/2022
1. By an order dated 18th July, 2018, passed in CM(M) 752/2018 and CM Nos. 26905-26906/2018, this Court directed grant of one opportunity to the petitioner, as the defendant in CS 618533/2016, to cross examine PW-2.
2. It appears that, thereafter, certain attempts at settlement were explored between the parties, but that, on 22nd November, 2018, the present respondent (the plaintiff in the suit) informed the learned Additional District Judge ("learned ADJ"), that amicable resolution had failed. The learned ADJ, thereupon, fixed the matter on 6th December, 2018 for allowing the petitioners-defendant an opportunity to examine PW-2.
3. There was no appearance before the learned ADJ on 6th December, 2018, whereupon, the learned ADJ proceeded to discharge PW-2 and closed the opportunity of the petitioner to cross examine him.
4. The petitioner, thereafter, moved an application
The court upheld the importance of substantial justice over technical procedural defaults, allowing an additional opportunity for witness cross-examination to uphold fairness in litigation.
The duty of the court is to take necessary steps to get to the truth of the matter and decide cases based on relevant material, while cautioning against routine use of the power to recall witnesses a....
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.
The right to effective cross-examination is fundamental to a fair trial, and parties must be given adequate opportunities to present their defenses, particularly when prior cross-examinations were in....
Default in prosecuting legal matters justifies closure of cross-examination rights; adjournments must be justified to ensure speedy court proceedings.
Payment of costs imposed only can be considered to be ‘special circumstances’ which were beyond knowledge and control of petitioner/defendant under Order 17 rule 2 of Civil Procedure Code.
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
