Back
SUBODH ABHYANKAR
Mohanlal – Appellant
Versus
Rameshwar – Respondent
ORDER
1. Heard finally with the consent of the parties.
2. This miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 5.10.2019, passed in Civil Suit No.1A/2015 by Ist Civil Judge, Class-I, Alirajpur (M.P.) whereby the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Order XVIII rule 3 of CPC to defer his evidence till the defendants have led their evidence has been rejected.
3. In brief, the facts of the case are that the suit has been filed by the plaintiff for partition, possession and permanent injunction against the respondents, the issues have already been framed and the plaintiff is to lead his evidence, however, before commencing with his evidence, the plaintiff has filed an application under Order XVIII rule 3 of CPC for deferring his evidence in respect of issues No. 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10 , which provides that “the party beginning the evidence may at this option produce the evidence on those issues or reserve it by way of answer to the evidence produced by the other party the burden of proving the same lies on the other party.”
4. In brief, the facts of the case are that the suit has been filed
The court upheld the principle that, ordinarily, the plaintiff must lead evidence first, barring exceptions, reaffirming the proper application of civil procedural rules regarding burden of proof.
The trial court must consider the presence of admissions in the written statement or counter claim before placing the burden of leading evidence on the defendants.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Order XVIII Rule 1 of the CPC and the court's discretion to direct the defendant to lead evidence first.
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....
Production of evidence – Requirement of Order XVIII Rule 3 of CPC would be treated to be sufficiently complied with if party leading evidence intimates Court before other party begins its evidence th....
The plaintiff cannot request the court to direct the defendant to lead evidence first, and the defendant's right to begin is contingent upon specific admissions by the defendant.
A party in a civil suit has the right to lead rebuttal evidence on issues where the burden of proof lies on the opposing party, even if the party has the burden of proof on other issues.
The main legal point established is the court's discretion to grant a final opportunity to lead evidence in a civil suit, emphasizing the importance of conducting proceedings diligently and cooperati....
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
