Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA
Tadavarthi Sri Anjaneya Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Yellanki Srinivas – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the case and facts concerning the suit. (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. court's reasoning on witness recall provisions. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. judicial observations emphasizing the lack of merit in the petition. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. final dismissal of the application with no costs. (Para 14) |
ORDER :
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
Heard Sri Alladi Ravinder, learned Senior Counsel, representing Sri M. Mallesham, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Smt. Chinthalaphani Avani Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.
2. This Civil Revision petition is preferred aggrieved by the order dated 24.06.2024 passed in I.A.No.214 of 2024 in O.S.No.20 of 2021 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Peddapalli.
3. PERUSED THE RECORD.
4. FACTS NOT IN DISPUTE :
The petitioner herein in the present CRP is the defendant in the main suit O.S.No.20 of 2021 on the file of the Court of Principal District Judge at Peddapalli.
The respondent herein had filed the main suit for recovery of money based on promissory note dated 01.09.2013 and original cheque bearing No.544000 on 30.12.2014. Thereafter, on 30.03.201
The power to recall witnesses under Order 18 Rule 17 is discretionary and should not be used to fill omissions in evidence, especially when such applications are made after undue delays.
A change of counsel does not justify recalling a witness for further cross-examination; sufficient grounds must be shown to avoid delaying proceedings.
The power to recall a witness under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC is intended to clarify doubts and not to fill omissions in evidence or to allow for further elaboration on left-out issues.
The denial of cross-examination constitutes serious procedural injustice, necessitating exercise of inherent powers for fairness and justice.
The court emphasized that the power to recall witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised judiciously, ensuring it is essential for a just decision and not merely to fill gaps in evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a party, after filing a separate written statement and pleading collusion and fraud, is entitled to cross-examine witnesses based on their wri....
The court emphasized that the power to recall witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised judiciously, ensuring it is essential for a just decision and not merely to fill gaps or delay proc....
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
