Back
ALOK AWASTHI
Vibhawna – Appellant
Versus
Anita – Respondent
ORDER
1. By this petition preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner/plaintiff has challenged the order dated 1.9.2025 passed by the 1st Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ratlam in RCS No.277/2018 whereby the application filed by the respondents under section 151 of CPC for not permitting the petitioner to record her deposition as plaintiff witness has been allowed.
2. The suit has been instituted by the plaintiff for specific performance of contract of the suit property. An application under the provisions of Order XVI rule 1 of CPC has been filed by the petitioner along with list of witnesses wherein the name of the petitioner and her husband were mentioned in item No.1 and 2, respectively. At the time of evidence the petitioner was ill therefore her statement was not recorded, however, her husband's evidence was recorded and when her health condition got improved, the petitioner appeared before the trial Court for evidence. At that time the respondent no.1 filed an application under section 151 of CPC for not permitting the petitioner to record her evidence on the basis of Section 120 of the Indian Evidence Act, which was allowed vide the impugned order.
3.
(1) Competency of a person to testify as a witness is a condition precedent to admissibility and credibility of his evidence.(2) In civil proceedings parties and their husbands and wives are competen....
A non-litigating spouse can testify on behalf of their litigating spouse without needing a power of attorney, per Section 120 of the Evidence Act.
A witness must have personal knowledge of the facts to testify, and a son cannot testify in place of a parent but can provide evidence if knowledgeable.
The court upheld the Family Court's decision to deny video conferencing for evidence recording, citing lack of legal provision and the petitioner's failure to appear in person.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an application under Order 18 Rule 17 of CPC cannot be used to fill up the omission in the evidence already let by a witness, and there is no ....
Parties in a civil suit can be summoned as witnesses under the CPC, but compelling testimony without sufficient cause violates procedural norms.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the second part of Order 18 Rule 3A of the CPC is mandatory in nature, and the recording of a party's statement after other witnesses can only....
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
