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

2023 Supreme(MP) 258

VIVEK AGARWAL
Shobarani – Appellant
Versus
Malti Bai – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Avinash Zargar for petitioners; Ashish Shroti for respondents.

ORDER

1. These Miscellaneous Petitions are filed b the defendant, being aggrieved of order dated 3.7.2018 and 13.3.2018, respectively, passed by learned II Civil Judge, Class-II, Khandwa (M.P.), in Civil Suit No.258-A/2016 & Civil Suit No.259-A/2016, whereby, application under Order 11 rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC' for short), moved by the defendant was rejected by the trial Court observing that since case was already fixed for evidence of the plaintiff and her affidavit in lieu of oral evidence was already filed, thus, there was no justification in filing application under Order 11 rule 1 CPC after ten months of filing of the affidavit of examination-in-chief, without cross-examining the plaintiff. Thus, recording a finding that since crossexamination of the plaintiff is pending, rejected the application under Order 11 rule 1 CPC.

2. Reliance is placed by Shri Zargar on the judgment of a Coordinate Bench in Poonam Mansharamani (Smt.) v. Ajit Mansharamani [I.L.R. (2016) M.P. 2999], wherein it is held that issues can be framed on the basis of interrogatories and trial Court was required to examine whether the interrogatories have reasonable close

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