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

1986 Supreme(Raj) 192

S.N.BHARGAVA
Kalu – Appellant
Versus
Chhitar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Rajendra Soni, for Appellants; B.L. Mandhana, for Respondents

S.N. BHARGAVA, J.—This is defendants second appeal against the judgement and decree passed by Additional District Judge No. 2, Alwar Camp, dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and decree passed by Munsif Magistrate, Behror.

2. Learned counsel for both the parties have made a request before me that this appeal may be disposed of at admission stage itself.

3. One of the points raised by learned counsel for the appellants is that defendants were not afforded ample opportunity to lead evidence and defendants witnesses were not examined as the list of witnesses was filed late.

4. The suit was filed on 6.10.1975; issues were framed on 14.3.1978 and when the plaintiffs were examining their witnesses, the defendants filed an application on 15.9.1979 alongwith list of witnesses which they wanted to examine. In the application, it was stated that the list could not be filed earlier as the defendant was ill. The paintiffs closed their evidence on 21.4.80 and thereafter, the case was fixed for defendants evidence. It was also ordered that if the defendant wanted to get the process issued, process fee should be filed within three days along with the witnesses expenses and the case was






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