Back
SANDEEP SHARMA
Sushma Aggarwal – Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Chand Aggarwal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep Sharma, J.
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 11.1.2023, passed by learned Sr. Civil Judge, Court No.1, Shimla, whereby an application under Order 18 Rule 17 read with section 151 CPC, having been filed by the petitioner/plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as ‘plaintiff’) for recalling the witness i.e. DW-9, namely, Ramesh Chand, for cross-examination, came to be dismissed, plaintiff has approached this court in the instant proceedings filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying therein to set-aside the aforesaid impugned order.
2. Precisely, the facts of the case as emerge from the record are that the plaintiff filed a suit for declaration to the effect that the properties comprised in Khasra No.259/2/A measuring 504 square yards and Khasra No.259/2/B, measuring 661 square yards, situated at Bothwell Lodge Estate, Shimla-Sanjauli Road, Shimla, were purchased by Sh. Mam Raj, the real owner with the funds of joint Hindu Family Benami, in the name of his wife Smt. Darshani Devi and mutation No.1261 regarding the sale deed No.179 dated 10.9.1970, mutation No.1262, regarding sale deed No.180 dated 10.9.1970 and mutation No.1330 of inherit
Order 18 Rule 17 CPC enables Court to recall any witness to clarify any doubts which it may have with regard to evidence led by parties.
The inherent power under Section 151 CPC cannot be utilized to recall witnesses solely to fill gaps in prior evidence; it requires clear justification based on necessity and cannot substitute for ade....
The power under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC to recall a witness is intended only for the Court to clarify specific doubts or ambiguities in evidence; it cannot be exercised routinely, nor should it be utili....
The recall of a witness under Order XVIII Rule 17 should be for clarifying doubts and not to fill up any lacuna or omission in the evidence already recorded.
The right to lead evidence is pivotal to a fair trial and partakes of the character of natural justice and fair play. The recall of a witness under Order XVIII Rule 17 should be for clarifying any do....
Litigants are bound by the conduct of their advocates, and CPC provisions cannot be used to remedy previous evidential deficiencies.
Conducting cross examination in a suit is a specialized job. It is only with experience that a counsel develops skills for cross examination. Different Advocates may conduct cross-examination in diff....
The power to recall witnesses under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC is to clarify ambiguities, not to fill evidentiary gaps, and should be exercised sparingly.
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
