Back
ARUN MONGA
Sukhdev Singh – Appellant
Versus
Mann Singh Alias Gurnam Singh (Deceased) thr. Lrs. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conditions under which witness re-examination can occur. (Para 1 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. court's discretion to allow witness re-examination. (Para 2 , 3 , 6) |
| 3. limits on witness re-examination based on prior testimony. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. conditions for permissible questions during re-examination. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. conclusion and final order of disposing the case. (Para 12) |
Judgment
Mr. Arun Monga, J.
Grievance of the petitioner, herein, is against an order dated 23.08.2021 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Amritsar, whereby, an application moved by respondent-defendants for re-examination of their own witness/DW-4 has been allowed. Petitioner is aggrieved that the same has been allowed after the completion of cross-examination of DW-4 which was carried out on deferred dates and any further opportunity to re-examine the same witness would be sheer wastage of time.
2. Having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, no grounds to interfere are made out.
3. The re-examination of the witness can be carried out by the trial Court on its own discretion at any stage of the trial, as is borne out from Order 18, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which
The power to recall a witness under Order 18 Rule 17 is discretionary and should not be used to exploit evidentiary gaps; it must prioritize justice and not disrupt trial proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an application to recall witnesses for cross-examination must be supported by valid reasons and cannot be allowed if it is an abuse of the pro....
Recall of witness – Section 138 of N.I. Act permits re-examination of witnesses but it cannot be exercised to the extent of taking away effect/withdraw any statement made during examination/cross-exa....
The court emphasized that powers under Order 18, Rule 17 CPC cannot be used to fill omissions in previously recorded witness evidence, reaffirming its intended use for clarification only.
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.
Re-examination of witnesses must be conducted orally in court, not via Affidavit, as per the Code of Civil Procedure.
The provisions of Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC are not intended to remedy omissions but to clarify existing evidence, emphasizing its cautious and discretionary use.
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
